Looking for more Cookbook contributors

**Terry Reedy** · Jul 18 '05, 05:03 PM

Re: Looking for more Cookbook contributors

"Jonathan Gennick" <jonathan@genni ck.com> wrote in message
news:0kavn019dk 6vf7ini32t3muc9 e6r9j7t1n@4ax.c om...[color=blue]
> Once again, I find myself looking to contact contributors to the
> Python Cookbook, this time for chapter 2. If you know how to contact
> any of the people listed below, please contact me at
> jgennick@oreill y.com . It would be a big help.
>
> Matteo Dell'Amico
> Sebastien Keim
> Yakov Markovitch
> Amos Newcombe
> John Nielsen
> Chris Perkins
> Nick Perkins
> Noah Spurrier
> Chui Tey
> Robin Thomas
> Jeremy Zucker[/color]

I have two suggestions:
1. list the invalid (bouncing) email address you have, if any.
2. try Googling both the web and newsgroups if you have not.

For instance 'Sebastien Keim', first web hit, has s.keim@laposte. net on a
page generated a month ago. Is that the invalid address you have or
something newer maybe?

Terry J. Reedy

**Alex Martelli** · Jul 18 '05, 05:04 PM

Re: Looking for more Cookbook contributors

Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.e du> wrote:
...[color=blue]
> 1. list the invalid (bouncing) email address you have, if any.[/color]

Not sure about the ones Jonathan listed, but I believe they aren't
bouncing, in general: they're simply not receiving our mails, or not
responding to them. Maybe spamfilters somewhere... it seems
inconsiderate to list a mail address for somebody who has not explicitly
"published" that address, and attract spam to that address thereby,
though.
[color=blue]
> 2. try Googling both the web and newsgroups if you have not.[/color]

Dunno if Jonathan has, but I have -- and for anybody recently posting
with different addresses from the one(s) they gave when posting to the
ActiveState site, we've tried it all. With some limited successes. But
with several remaining failures, and the names Jonathan listed are such
failures (for the first few chapters -- we have many more to come...).
[color=blue]
> For instance 'Sebastien Keim', first web hit, has s.keim@laposte. net on a
> page generated a month ago. Is that the invalid address you have or
> something newer maybe?[/color]

It's that one. It's not invalid: we don't see bounces. Our mails are
just getting ignored -- that's all we know.

If somebody puts their email addresses on the web and newsgroups,
they're probably getting thousands of spam messages a day, so either
they don't read that mailbox or have strong spamfilters on it -- and
strong spamfilters sometimes misclassify some valid mails as spam,
inevitably. So, we're trying to get through or around anyway, to get
the "Python community's book" 2nd edition published with all proper
permissions, and credits, and a complimentary copy to each contributor.

It was nowhere near as hard for the 1st edition -- posts were more
recent, there was less spam around, the community was smaller. Sigh.
With things as they are now, the model just doesn't work any more; it
takes far too much time and energy to chase down everybody we'd want to
credit as a contributor in order to get proper permissions and snailmail
addresses for complimentary copies.

If anybody ever again in the future tries to make such a
"community-written book", my FIRST piece of advice to them is: _start_
by accepting into the website only those submissions which are
accompanied by whatever permissions, acceptances, addresses, etc, you
need (in case those submissions are later included in the book) to be
legally covered, give credit where credit is due, and send complimentary
copies or whatever. Otherwise, the process is just too difficult:-(.

Alex

**Terry Reedy** · Jul 18 '05, 05:06 PM

Re: Looking for more Cookbook contributors

"Alex Martelli" <aleaxit@yahoo. com> wrote in message
news:1gmdbxx.o5 7i68hu9achN%ale axit@yahoo.com. ..[color=blue]
> Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.e du> wrote:
> ...[color=green]
>> 1. list the invalid (bouncing) email address you have, if any.[/color][/color]
[color=blue]
> inconsiderate to list a mail address for somebody who has not explicitly
> "published" that address, and attract spam to that address thereby,
> though.[/color]

Of course, especially if in machine harvestible form, which is why I
specified 'invalid'. My unstated point still stands: if one asks 'Do you
have better info than I do', it is much easier to sensibly respond if the
requestor lists the known info.
[color=blue]
> It's that one. It's not invalid: we don't see bounces. Our mails are
> just getting ignored -- that's all we know.[/color]

I am surprised. Maybe some mail systems have given up on bounces, perhaps
since they validate the good addresses by not bouncing.
[color=blue]
> takes far too much time and energy to chase down everybody we'd want to
> credit as a contributor in order to get proper permissions and snailmail
> addresses for complimentary copies.[/color]

You have my sympathy. When my wife published an art history book with
photos of sculptures owned by 30+ entities, getting all the needed
permissions, often requiring owner-specific forms, was not the funnest part
;-).

Terry J. Reedy

**Andrew Dalke** · Jul 18 '05, 05:06 PM

Re: Looking for more Cookbook contributors

Terry Reedy wrote:[color=blue]
> I am surprised. Maybe some mail systems have given up on bounces, perhaps
> since they validate the good addresses by not bouncing.[/color]

My machine is one. Before I turned on filtering I was getting ...
12,000 spams a day sent to made up addresses @ my domain. (They were
all forwarded to me). I decided to /dev/null them instead of bouncing
in part to prevent the validation and in part because the 'from'
addresses were often forged, so my bounce mail would either end up in
some Random J. Blow's box or in turn get bounced back to me.

Andrew
dalke@dalkescie ntific.com

**Cliff Wells** · Jul 18 '05, 05:06 PM

Re: Looking for more Cookbook contributors

On Fri, 2004-10-29 at 04:56 +0000, Andrew Dalke wrote:[color=blue]
> Terry Reedy wrote:[color=green]
> > I am surprised. Maybe some mail systems have given up on bounces, perhaps
> > since they validate the good addresses by not bouncing.[/color]
>
> My machine is one. Before I turned on filtering I was getting ...
> 12,000 spams a day sent to made up addresses @ my domain. (They were
> all forwarded to me). I decided to /dev/null them instead of bouncing
> in part to prevent the validation and in part because the 'from'
> addresses were often forged, so my bounce mail would either end up in
> some Random J. Blow's box or in turn get bounced back to me.[/color]

I wish more admins would do this. Bouncing messages to invalid accounts
is worse than worthless these days.

--
Cliff Wells <clifford.wells @comcast.net>

**Michael Foord** · Jul 18 '05, 05:07 PM

Re: Looking for more Cookbook contributors

Cliff Wells <clifford.wells @comcast.net> wrote in message news:<mailman.5 648.1099041856. 5135.python-list@python.org >...[color=blue]
> On Fri, 2004-10-29 at 04:56 +0000, Andrew Dalke wrote:[color=green]
> > Terry Reedy wrote:[color=darkred]
> > > I am surprised. Maybe some mail systems have given up on bounces, perhaps
> > > since they validate the good addresses by not bouncing.[/color]
> >
> > My machine is one. Before I turned on filtering I was getting ...
> > 12,000 spams a day sent to made up addresses @ my domain. (They were
> > all forwarded to me). I decided to /dev/null them instead of bouncing
> > in part to prevent the validation and in part because the 'from'
> > addresses were often forged, so my bounce mail would either end up in
> > some Random J. Blow's box or in turn get bounced back to me.[/color]
>
> I wish more admins would do this. Bouncing messages to invalid accounts
> is worse than worthless these days.[/color]

I'm taking this even more OT... my biggest source of junk mail is
virus warnings sent automatically as responses to virus emails with
forged from addresses. Its *really* annoying.....

Fuzzy

**Peter Hansen** · Jul 18 '05, 05:07 PM

OT: invalid email bounces (was Re: Looking for more Cookbook contributors)

>>>I decided to /dev/null them instead of bouncing[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>>in part to prevent the validation and in part because the 'from'
>>>addresses were often forged, so my bounce mail would either end up in
>>>some Random J. Blow's box or in turn get bounced back to me.[/color]
>>
>>I wish more admins would do this. Bouncing messages to invalid accounts
>>is worse than worthless these days.[/color]
>
> I'm taking this even more OT... my biggest source of junk mail is
> virus warnings sent automatically as responses to virus emails with
> forged from addresses. Its *really* annoying.....[/color]

It may all be off-topic (and I've changed the subject, hint, hint)
but I thank all of you for bringing the point up, and I've just
reconfigured my server to stop bouncing mails sent to unrecognized
addresses on my domains. Should have thought of that myself... :-(

-Peter

**Terry Reedy** · Jul 18 '05, 05:07 PM

Re: Looking for more Cookbook contributors

"Michael Foord" <fuzzyman@gmail .com> wrote in message
news:6f402501.0 410290730.6704e 38@posting.goog le.com...
[color=blue]
> I'm taking this even more OT... my biggest source of junk mail is
> virus warnings sent automatically as responses to virus emails with
> forged from addresses. Its *really* annoying.....[/color]

Especially when the forged 'from:' is the Python mailing list... Yes, very
annoying.

TJR

Looking for more Cookbook contributors

Looking for more Cookbook contributors

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment