[Operators] Announce: Jabber Spam Fighting Manifesto (for public servers)

Hanno Böck hanno at hboeck.de
Sun Feb 11 14:16:38 UTC 2018

Hi again,

On Thu, 8 Feb 2018 09:31:51 +0100
Georg Lukas <georg at op-co.de> wrote:

> I have prepared a Jabber Spam Fighting Manifesto, available at
> https://github.com/ge0rg/jabber-spam-fighting-manifesto

I have a specific question.

This manifesto asks me to implement XEP-0157:

This is to provide contact addresses for various purposes. So far so
obvious. However I'm wondering a bit (and XEP-0157 doesn't answer that)
how I best handle this. This document proposes a long list of possible
contacts named abuse-addresses, admin-addresses,
feedback-addresses, ...
There's no hierarchy that says any of them are mandatory or more
important than the others.

In my case, and probably in many other cases, there is simply one
contact for everything. What's the best practice here?
I wish the XEP would be clearer. It would be more obvious to me to have
one default contact (e.g. default-addresses) and that I set the others
only if they are handled by separate people.

I can of course just set them all, but it seems a bit silly.

I'd propose that the spam manifesto makes the recommendation to
implement XEP-0157 more clear, i.e. either saying "as a minimum you
should set the abuse address" or saying "you should set *all* the
addresses in XEP-0157". In any case, something that is sufficiently
clear that we don't have to argue later whether something complies with
the manifesto.

Hanno Böck

mail/jabber: hanno at hboeck.de
GPG: FE73757FA60E4E21B937579FA5880072BBB51E42
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/operators/attachments/20180211/ab3bc763/attachment.sig>

More information about the Operators mailing list