Live data from Hacker News

Lies we tell ourselves about email addresses

gitpush--force.com

131–140 of 197 posts

Re: Lies we tell ourselves about email addresses

#131

We have a UK client in the healthcare industry who registered the domain clientname.healthcare, and they rapidly found that the NHS imposed regexes which rejected name@clientname.healthcare emails. Aside from regexes though, I also think the new TLDs confuse quite a lot of people. name@clientname.healthcare just doesn't click as an email address as quickly as name@clientname.com, and I'm in tech so I'm sure it's much…

the domain name of my former employer was 18 digits long and i had to login in 10 services a day with it, it was a bit horrible

having a 10 digits tld is self-harming

Re: Lies we tell ourselves about email addresses

#132

We have a UK client in the healthcare industry who registered the domain clientname.healthcare, and they rapidly found that the NHS imposed regexes which rejected name@clientname.healthcare emails. Aside from regexes though, I also think the new TLDs confuse quite a lot of people. name@clientname.healthcare just doesn't click as an email address as quickly as name@clientname.com, and I'm in tech so I'm sure it's much…

I have noticed many non-techies simply put words into the address bar and click on the first link from the search result.

So if people just remembers spacename.house then that might be enough.

My dad tend to skip the TLD part as well. The results usually work. When they do not - he gets very confused.

The Internet is really a gold rush for scammers.

Re: Lies we tell ourselves about email addresses

#133
There is one more 'lie' missing and not included in that writing which only looks email addresses what is are limits of valid destination addresses.

But if used as a senders source address there are even less limits.

For example you can use a null address when sending. That has been used bit less these days than earlier. It's been used ages SMTP delivery status notifications, mail loop prevention and so where intentionally not much sense to expect anyone to reply. And all well known MTA's forward it and email clients handle it very well by disabling reply to that message.

There is however a catch that anyone who thinks he would now start using it when he doesn't want any reply. Ever since IT Service Management (ITSM) and Service Desk software appeared, they have had issues with email coming from sender, because they like to always add received messages email addresses to database, where then someone handling would reply. I've been using only few, Service Now (SN) more lately and before Issue Tracker (IT), both didn't at least about year and half ago know how to handle null sender addresses. Both seemed to just discard or sort some trash bin those emails. With our SN sysadmin didn't find where those went in that system.

But otherwise as a sender works great. And sure it would be great if those ITSM making folks would get this fixed, because when your postmaster, postmaster, etc. and such role-aliases are the quite often handled by ITSM software, there is good chance you don't get some important notifications from systems that rely on that null address sender.

ps. Search Google: smtp and sender address as "" for more info incase needed.

Re: Lies we tell ourselves about email addresses

#134

I, too, get so frustrated by + addresses not working that I’ve configured my MDA to rewrite —- (double hyphen) to plus, and use this in spite on sites that dislike the + variant. I’ve made it impossible to /not/ host my own mail delivery infrastructure now if I want every address I’ve ever given out to still work. Although more recently I’ve moved to a catch all domain for throwaway, which is even better. It confuses…

How do you deal with sending emails? When I was self hosting my emails would be flagged by Gmail (or any other email providers) so I effectively only had a self hosted inbox, which sucks

Re: Lies we tell ourselves about email addresses

#135

We have a UK client in the healthcare industry who registered the domain clientname.healthcare, and they rapidly found that the NHS imposed regexes which rejected name@clientname.healthcare emails. Aside from regexes though, I also think the new TLDs confuse quite a lot of people. name@clientname.healthcare just doesn't click as an email address as quickly as name@clientname.com, and I'm in tech so I'm sure it's much…

I did similar several years ago with the .services TLD. Lo-and-behold, I bought the .com not long afterwards!

Re: Lies we tell ourselves about email addresses

#136
post #89
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bill Bryson claimed to have received a letter addressed to ‘Bill Bryson, Writer, Yorkshire’. I have some cousins who live in a small town in Australia where the houses have neither names nor numbers. You just address the envelope to ‘ , , ’, and it’s the postie’s responsibility to know where everyone lives. (‘Postie’ is the official job title in Australia Post because it’s gender-neutral.)

I love these examples because they show that addressing has never really been as formal as we like to pretend

Falsehoods programmers believe about addresses

https://www.mjt.me.uk/posts/falsehoods-programmers-believe-a...

Re: Lies we tell ourselves about email addresses

#137
post #89
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bill Bryson claimed to have received a letter addressed to ‘Bill Bryson, Writer, Yorkshire’. I have some cousins who live in a small town in Australia where the houses have neither names nor numbers. You just address the envelope to ‘ , , ’, and it’s the postie’s responsibility to know where everyone lives. (‘Postie’ is the official job title in Australia Post because it’s gender-neutral.)

I love these examples because they show that addressing has never really been as formal as we like to pretend

[deleted]

Re: Lies we tell ourselves about email addresses

#138
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love these examples because they show that addressing has never really been as formal as we like to pretend

Falsehoods programmers believe about addresses https://www.mjt.me.uk/posts/falsehoods-programmers-believe-a...

And various discussions:

* https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=mjt.me.uk

Re: Lies we tell ourselves about email addresses

#139

> In that sense, it’s actually pretty surprising that so much of the world’s population wasn’t able to put their own name, in its native written form, in an email address until just 14 years ago. Maybe for some internal usages. but imagine someone from a country using different language and characters gives me a card with their email. It's now far less portable for me to use it. Those days, I surely could picture it…

What if the agreed upon international standard alphabet didn't happen to be the one you natively write with? If the world agreed to write all email addresses in katakana, that would work just as well as ASCII, right? I have to ask this because a lot of people confuse "single international character set" with "single international character set that happens to be my one." If you'd also be okay with katakana, then you're consistent.
Post reply on HN