Leo + Python: the ultimate scripting tool: Conclusion

[Terry Reedy]

"Brad Clements" <bkc at Murkworks.com> wrote in message
news:mailman.888.1069253598.702.python-list at python.org...

> > Terry Reedy wrote:
> > > I am somewhat flabbergasted that more people do not see the
oddity of
> > > "I will not read your first message (yet) but I will read a
second
> > > message from you in which you attempt to give me a reason that I
find
> > > 'acceptible', according to my unknown-to-you whims, that I do
read
> > > your first message."

> Where did his message say this?  I went through the web confirmation
thingy
> and I don't recall the original response message saying what you
quoted
> above, or even anything remotely close to that at all.

The above is a paraphrase designed to expose the essence of what I see
as an oddity.  The key words 'acceptable' 'reason' are direct quotes
from the original message, which I quoted in full in my original
message (Nov 9, when I very briefly stated my objection reason).  Here
is the response message again..

---"""
You recently sent a message to me at the email address
edreamleo at charter.net. To help cope with the ever increasing volume of
junk e-mail, I am using ChoiceMail, a permission-based e-mail
filtering tool. Your original e-mail is being held by ChoiceMail until
you complete the following simple one-time process.
Please click on the link
[Click here to request approval]
When your browser opens, fill in your name and a short reason for
wanting to send e-mail to me. If your reason is acceptable, your first
email and all subsequent e-mails from you will be delivered to me
normally.
"""---

On Nov 13, in response to questions about my briefly stated objection,
I noted that my reasons had nothing to do with EReam or Leo per se and
then explained them in some detail.  The paraphrase, which still looks
pretty accurate to me, was part of that long post and might be better
understood in context.

> What's the difference between TMDA and what Edward is using?
> Email vs. a Web confirmation.
> While I prefer simply replying to an email message, I don't
> see *that* much difference between the two.

Some differences explained in the Nov 13 post:
1. Complete interaction with original system (email) versus requiring
access to another system (web browser) which sender might not have
immediately available or even at all.
2. Confirm authorship of original message versus give 'reason [that]
is acceptible' that it should be read.
3. Keep interaction more or less private versus involve commercial
third party.

We may, of course, disagree on the importance of these even if we
agree that they are accurate.

Terry J. Reedy