4 ms·
[author here] Because I'm also sending a lot more info on things I had to cut from the talk for time (eg. samples of test code). I haven't finished or polished
by Harkins 11y ago
[author here]
Because I'm also sending a lot more info on things I had to cut from the talk for time (eg. samples of test code). I haven't finished or polished the stuff that I knew early I had to cut, so it's coming out as I can finish it.
Sorry it was unclear, I'll improve the text on that pgae.
- chinathrow 11y agoThanks for your feedback. I was really interested in the slides - but not on a newsletter subscription.
- Shengbo 11y agoI think it would be nice to make that clear and allow people to make a choice. Otherwise most people will just use a spam address they never check.
- chinathrow 11y agoYou need an address to get the slides download link in his case.
- Harkins 11y agoYep. I've also seen a few people using the same strategy I do of user+sitename.com@example.com so they can recognize when email addresses get abused and trivially filter them. For what it's worth, I have cleaned up enough servers hacked by spammers that I'll never send one. I guess I should mention that.
- toxicFork 11y agoThat works until someone writes a script that removes any \+[^@]+ from specific email domains :)
- derefr 11y agoI've never seen that (or any other purposeful filtering of address tags.) On the other hand, I can't count the number of sites that were just programmed with an address validation regex that is unaware of the existence of address tags, and therefore thinks your email address with a plus in it is invalid.