All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
use Perl Log In
barbie (2653)
reversethis-{ku. ... m} {ta} {eibrab}
http://barbie.missbarbell.co.uk/
Leader of Birmingham.pm [pm.org] and a CPAN author [cpan.org]. Co-organised YAPC::Europe in 2006 and the 2009 QA Hackathon, responsible for the YAPC Conference Surveys [yapc-surveys.org] and the QA Hackathon [qa-hackathon.org] websites. Also the current caretaker for the CPAN Testers websites and data stores.
If you really want to find out more, buy me a Guinness
Links:
Memoirs of a Roadie [missbarbell.co.uk]
[pm.org]
CPAN Testers Reports [cpantesters.org]
YAPC Conference Surveys [yapc-surveys.org]
QA Hackathon [qa-hackathon.org]
Spamming CPAN
JJ emailed me this morning to ask me not to delete a possible mail in my personal email box. Thankfully I read his mail before deleting my spam (these days I only get a handful anyway thanks to all the filters). He pointed me at Beatnik's journal and The Register, as to why.
It appears someone has discovered a large resource for email addresses for Perl developers; CPAN. So they have quite happily reaped all the addresses and sent UCE to them all. Now for those not in the UK, there may be nothing you can do beyond delete the thing and set up filters. However, The Register article highlights a court action that was taken by someone who was the recipient to a similar email. He won.
Seeing as there are a few people from MessageLabs on CPAN now, this could prove interesting. Sending UCE to anyone is bad enough, sending it to those who work in the Anti-Spam industry is asking for trouble. I'm not sure where this will go, but I don't think they'll be getting the kind of response they were hoping for.
UPDATE: Thanks to the feedback from Smylers, the agent in question, has apologise for their actions. It's a shame that agents don't think carefully about their actions. Once upon a time it wouldn't have caused a stir, but then that was so long ago, I'm not even sure that agents were online back then!
--Larry Wall in stab.c from the perl source code
So I wasn't the only one... (Score:2)
-Dom
Re: So I wasn't the only one... (Score:1)
Why did that shock you? Or to put it another way round, what aspects of spam messages did that e-mail have such that you'd expect it to be classified as spam?
It also got through SpamAssassin with a score of 0.0. But I can't see anything in it which would trigger a rule: the content is as you would expect for a job recommendation from somebody who knows you; the headers ar
Re: So I wasn't the only one... (Score:2)
Resolved (Score:1)
Apologies to anybody who received this e-mail and was irritated by doing so. It was sent by an external recruiter we're currently using for a vacancy.
We've explained to him that this sort of thing is not welcomed and is likely to be counter-productive; he now understands this, sends his apologies, and won't be doing it any more.
Obviously this isn't as good as if the mail hadn't been sent, but after the event it's the best we can think of. Sorry, again.
Smylers
Re: (Score:1)
You should probably post this in your journal and in the Perl News section at PerlMonks. A comment somewhere on a use Perl journal is just not visible enough.