Yahoo E-Mail

[Pioneer]

Ok, so I did not know exactly where to put this but since E-Mail is a form of communication, but not pertaining to the topics there, I'm just tossing it in General Chat. I thought ya'll might like to know...

I was sending an E-Mail to a very good friend this evening and because he and I discussed what I saw in a video, he asked me to send him the link.

Seemed simple enough.

The E-Mail was titled "The Video". Nothing out of the ordinary as I use this title quite often.

The body of the E-Mail simply said, "Here's the video" and I made that the link to the video.

Again, I thought absolutely nothing of this. The video is legal to watch so I didn't foresee a problem at all.

The E-Mail was returned undeliverable back to my own E-Mail with the reason(s) as being "Remote host said: 554 Message not allowed - Email not accepted for policy reasons."

So anyway. I got around it by using a series of codes which I will not get into, but just thought those of you using a free web-based email should know you do not have the freedom to receive just anything you may want.

My best advice would be to purchase a Domain Name for little of nothing and most often, they come with 1 free email account. I'd recommend making the domain name registration private but that is really a personal choice.

Additionally, I will not disclose the video I was sending the link to either but still thought this should be known.

After thinking about this, I just remembered this particular friend does have an account with MSN so I probably could have tried that but did not.

[cwconnertx]

Generally those messages and policy reasons pertain to information security or other adminsitrative policies that have to do with the system, not the content of the video, which is extremely difficult to ascertain.

Sometimes policies reject emails for being too large, having a virus, having too small of a message but a large attachment (since malicious hackers often send a virus with a message that says click here)

I wouldn't immeadiately attribute this to message content, expecially since the content of a video is extremely difficult to filter. Computers have a hard time identifying pictures and there is no manpower to search pictures and video sent through emails.

The policy here is probably innocuous, if a bit inconvienient. I don't think we are talking about censorship or anything.

[Pioneer]

Generally those messages and policy reasons pertain to information security or other adminsitrative policies that have to do with the system, not the content of the video, which is extremely difficult to ascertain.

Sometimes policies reject emails for being too large, having a virus, having too small of a message but a large attachment (since malicious hackers often send a virus with a message that says click here)

I wouldn't immeadiately attribute this to message content, expecially since the content of a video is extremely difficult to filter. Computers have a hard time identifying pictures and there is no manpower to search pictures and video sent through emails.

The policy here is probably innocuous, if a bit inconvienient. I don't think we are talking about censorship or anything.

Trust me, it was censorship, 100%, for the content of the video. I do not agree with the content really being available online but at the same time, under circumstances, and taking freedom of speech and expression into consideration, couldn't I see actually banning it either.

Because I received an automated bounce from the yahoo host,(qmail-send program at p3plsmtpa01-01.prod.phx3.secureserver.net) I can only assume yahoo simply blocked that specific link. Again, I have mixed feelings about anyone not allowing "real news videos" to be sent through e-mail but yahoo's security had nothing to do with this in this instance.

What I failed to mention in my original post was, after I realized the mail did not go through, I dropped the http:// in another mail, dropped the www. and the .com in another email and still, separated the letters by spaces, put part of the link in a sentence where I was just rambling and the other part in a different paragraph, and still, they too did not go through. Yesterday, just to experiment some, I tried sending it exactly as I did the first time to the same friend but to his MSN account and it DID go through so I guess calling the entry, Yahoo mail was actually appropriate.

[avking]

If you do not like the service do not use it. It is a free service offered by a corporation. They get to make any decisions regarding the services they provide and that is how things should be. It is no different than a business that hangs a sign that says they retain the right to refuse service if they so choose.

Not exactly the same circumstances, but I hear people bitch and moan about yahoo, google and or msn a LOT. Jeeez, it is free. If you don't like it, then stop being so cheap and pay for a service that offers the improvements you desire. The same sentiment is why our country is in the trouble it is today. Entitlement. Everyone thinks they are entitled to something, be it free email, a plasma tv or a new car.

Not directed at Pioneer, but the population as a whole.

[Big_Saw]

If you do not like the service do not use it. It is a free service offered by a corporation. They get to make any decisions regarding the services they provide and that is how things should be. It is no different than a business that hangs a sign that says they retain the right to refuse service if they so choose.

Not exactly the same circumstances, but I hear people bitch and moan about yahoo, google and or msn a LOT. Jeeez, it is free. If you don't like it, then stop being so cheap and pay for a service that offers the improvements you desire. The same sentiment is why our country is in the trouble it is today. Entitlement. Everyone thinks they are entitled to something, be it free email, a plasma tv or a new car.

Not directed at Pioneer, but the population as a whole.

Kind of a tart response, but I have to agree...."free lunch" means you eat what's in front of you....like it or not....

[Pioneer]

I guess I probably should have also stated, I do not use Yahoo or any other "free" e-mail service, I have my own. But not everyone else does.

This was also the first time I had a problem sending anything through yahoo.

At any rate, I was just stating an experience I had with yahoo and thought it might be of use to someone.

[cwconnertx]

What I failed to mention in my original post was, after I realized the mail did not go through, I dropped the http:// in another mail, dropped the www. and the .com in another email and still, separated the letters by spaces, put part of the link in a sentence where I was just rambling and the other part in a different paragraph, and still, they too did not go through. Yesterday, just to experiment some, I tried sending it exactly as I did the first time to the same friend but to his MSN account and it DID go through so I guess calling the entry, Yahoo mail was actually appropriate.

Sorry, thought you actually sent a video. I have no doubt they have the ability to filter for links. Text is easy to scan and filter. Pictures and videos much more difficult.

[avking]

This is an example of what I meant with my response above. Not directed at any one person, but the country as a whole. The excerpt below is where the country is steering our Internet communications and telling everyone that it is a right. But, it is not a right. You do not have a fundamental or god given right to high speed Internet. You work hard and then pay for it. It is along the lines of my "everyone thinks they have a right to a plasma tv." What a bunch of BS. So, you can't apply for a job without high speed Internet. What a crock. The kinds of jobs people without access to Internet are applying for or qualified for, are not restricted to applying for on the Internet.

BROADBAND TOUTED AS 'CIVIL RIGHT'
[SOURCE: CongressDaily, AUTHOR: Sara Jerome]
Broadband advocates, civil rights activists, and Federal Communications Commission officials described high-speed Internet service as a "civil right" during an FCC public hearing Monday night in Memphis focused on the digital divide. "Universal access to broadband needs to be seen as a civil right...[even though] not many people have talked about it that way," Commissioner Michael Copps said. The event was one in a series as the FCC works to craft a national broadband plan by February. Panelists described a digital gap in which rural, minority, and low-income Americans subscribe to broadband at lower rates than the general population. Non-users face educational challenges, difficulty applying for jobs, and limited access to government services in a world where many of these functions have moved online, panelists said. "Broadband is becoming a basic necessity," Benjamin Hooks, the first black FCC commissioner and a former NAACP executive director, said. Panelists noted that affordability and a lack of education about broadband's benefits are key barriers to universal adoption. Increased access at community centers could serve as a "first step" in informing these groups about the need to adopt broadband, Metropolitan Inter-Faith Association Vice President Dianne Polly said.