[governance] Blogpost: Gmail Hell Day 4: Dealing with the Borg (Or “Being Evil” Without Really Thinking About It

[Norbert Bollow]

McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:
> > a) The problem could be addressed by empowering end users to switch
> > email service providers without changing their email addresses. I
> > suggested that CCTLD operators would be able to make a category of
> > inexpensive third-level domain names available for this.
> 
> Google and KENIC have already done this in Kenya, but I digress.
> 
> How would this alleviate a situation like M.G.s?

If Google unexpetctedly closes down his email address, or otherwise
stops providing a reasonable service, he can use a different
service provider, or set up his own mailserver, and have his
email go to the new place by updating the MX record.

For computer users with more avarage skills, maybe current
off-the-shelf software doesn't make these steps easy enough.
But M.G. would have managed, I believe.

> > b) The problem could be addressed by creating a standards-track RFC
> > that promotes better behavior
> 
> Please specify what behavior needs to be better.

** Never close down a service without fair warning on the basis
** of actions of the user that the user could reasonably expect
** to be acceptable.

I think that if users are given several GBs worth of mailbox
quota, it should be considered normal usage to actually have
several GBs of email there.

Google representatives have pretty prominently given talks mentioning
the work of their "data liberation team" in ways that gave at least
me the expectation that at least for Google's major service offerings
(this certainly includes Gmail), one can always download one's data
when desired.

So in my eyes the reasonable expectation is that one should be
able to download one's entire mailbox contents without ill effects,
even if that's several GBs of data.

If Google doesn't want that to happen without e.g. the end user
explicitly confirming "yes this is what I want to do", they could
disable this functionality in their POP server with a web interface
based override.

But they let the user do it and *then* they close down the user's
email address without any warning. That I think is unacceptable.

> IIUC, user is POPing years of his gmail into outlook.  How can you
> legislate/write an RFC about that?  If i am offering a free webmail,
> and someone tries to POP 12 Gigs of data off it,  I'm going to have
> a script that automagically shuts down that behavior until a human
> can look into it!

Nota bene, they didn't just shut down "that behavior", but the email
address in its entirety.

And scripts that shut down things "until a human can look into it"
are generally only appropriate if things are organized so that someone
will actually be able to look into the matter in a timely manner.
And what would the human do? Check if it's a case of someone
downloading their entire mailbox, and then re-enable the account? In
that case, what was the point of closing it down in the first place?

Greetings,
Norbert

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t