"Third-party" for email but who is which "person"?

  • Thread starter Thread starter symbolipoint
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Email
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the terminology of "first-party," "second-party," and "third-party" in the context of online accounts and email addresses, particularly focusing on the use of third-party email addresses for creating accounts with services like Microsoft. The conversation also touches on linguistic aspects and the historical context of certain terms.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the term "third-party" refers to email providers like Google, AOL, Yahoo, or Proton, which are not directly involved in the contract between the user and Microsoft.
  • Others clarify that "first-party" and "second-party" refer to the user and Microsoft, respectively, in the context of the service agreement.
  • A participant draws a parallel between the party terminology and first, second, and third person pronouns, suggesting that the terminology serves a similar function in contracts.
  • Several posts diverge into a seemingly unrelated discussion about historical drug use and alcohol during the Prohibition era, questioning the effects of substances like wood alcohol and absinthe.
  • Another participant humorously references the concept of "eighth" and "ninth" parties, linking it to a classic video, which adds a layer of ambiguity to the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying interpretations of the terminology, with some agreeing on the definitions of first, second, and third parties, while others introduce unrelated topics, indicating a lack of consensus on the main focus of the discussion.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes references to historical context and terminology that may not be fully resolved, particularly regarding the implications of substance use and its effects, as well as the linguistic parallels drawn by participants.

symbolipoint
Homework Helper
Education Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
7,643
Reaction score
2,081
My best guess is this question could be about something linguistic, but it's also technical about online accounts and email addresses.

One can choose to let's say, create a Microsoft account, use a "third-party" email address and therefore not create the MS account to have an outlook.com address. This way, person does not have an outlook.com email address. When person signs into MS account, he uses his third part email address and his M.S. password.

This "third party" email address would be often something from GMail or AOL or Yahoo or PROTON,... or something.

Why is this called "third-party"? Then, who or what or which are "second-party" and "first-party"?
 
Science news on Phys.org
symbolipoint said:
Then, who or what or which are "second-party" and "first-party"?
These are you and Microsoft (which way round they are is not relevant), the two parties to the contract for the services you are signing up for.

symbolipoint said:
Why is this called "third-party"?
Because Google/AOL/Yahoo/Proton are not you or Microsoft and are not a party to the contract.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50 and Ibix
It's the same as first, second and third person pronouns. "I" is the first person pronoun, "you" is the second and "he"/"she" is the third. So I make an agreement with you that may involve you choosing to use services provided by him.

In fact, I think the "party" terminology does much the same job as pronouns, but primarily in standard contracts. You can have a pre-prepared form that has many clauses that say things like The first party agrees to pay the second party £______ per ______ in exchange for which the second party shall perform work as directed by the first party. Then you just stick In this contract, "the first party" refers to ______ and "the second party" refers to ______ at the top, and you can use the same form for every employee of Bloodsucking Capitalists R Us and its various subsidiary organisations without having to write the names into every clause.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: symbolipoint
 
  • Haha
  • Wow
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: symbolipoint, BillTre, PeroK and 2 others
Vanadium 50 said:

1.25 "I was blind for three days." What parties did they do in them days!?

EDIT: "Those days."
 
pinball1970 said:
1.25 "I was blind for three days." What parties did they do in them days!?

EDIT: "Those days."
Prohibition - wood alcohol? Although I thought that once that made you blind that was it for your sight.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: symbolipoint
They did drugs too in the 1890s but were limited to natural stuff like marijuana, or less likely peyote, coca leaf (coca cola/cocaine), datura (jimsonweed) and opium.

Abisynth was considered an exotic high alcohol content 90% taboo drink and was banned because it was believed to a hallucinogenic drug.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absinthe?wprov=sfti1
 
Seem be the "eighth" part and the "ninth part" are still really Third-Party parts. About that classic video with Chico and Groucho
 
Ibix said:
Prohibition - wood alcohol? Although I thought that once that made you blind that was it for your sight.
They used to stain methylated spirits pink in the 70s presumably as a warning.
A quick Google and wiki says the methanol is metabolised to methanoic acid and methanal which is what does the damage to the opic nerve, permanent as you said.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
8K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
11K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K