|
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 26 Jan 1995 13:07:42 EST |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Organization: |
L-Soft international, Inc. |
Reply-To: |
|
On Thu, 26 Jan 1995 12:02:00 EST s.merchant said:
>The first is from Compu$erve (they want $$$$, apparently). "Postage Due"?!
>That's a new one!
>================
>From: Electronic Postmaster <[log in to unmask]>
>Comments: Returned from: <[log in to unmask]>
>
>Re: ? EMDRPD - Mail Delivery Failure. Refused -- Postage Due. 76102,3333
>================
No, what that (probably) means is that the person in question hasn't paid
his Compu$erve bill. They charge for incoming Internet messages, and the
subject line always has a little "+Postage Due!" reminder in it--if you
don't read it, they don't charge you...or something like that. It's very
weird. So Compu$erve is bouncing the message because the user hasn't
paid--I guess.
>The second is a little more disturbing. It's a terse and unhelpful reply
>to my request to a postmaster to fix their backwards mailers that attempt
>to send messages for 31(!) days, and let you know for that it didn't go
>through the first time only 8 days later! So you know you have a backlog
>of at least 8 days of bounces even if you delete the person
>immediately. Just FYI.
>================
<deleted the quoted bounce>
Of course he can fix it. He just doesn't want to (or doesn't know how
to)--or his site guidelines are set in stone and if he changes them he
gets fired (or put on days or something:). The question is whether or
not it is a "fix" to him. As far as he's concerned, his system is
working just fine.
I had a postmaster somewhere do this to me not long ago. I felt like
forwarding him all of the bounces when he said he couldn't purge the
user's queue, then at least he would get to suffer right along with
me. But I didn't do it. Too time consuming (of my time, not his).
Nathan
|
|
|