Doing so directly
sanctions the sort of behaviour that has created the need for this
document to begin with.
that's a silly statement. it's one thing to insist that mail responders
minimize potential harm, quite another to insist that they use one
particular mechanism which is known to not work adequately in practice.
Why doesn't it work? Because people have caved in to those who violate
the standard. If those people (the violators) will let their ignorance
turn <> into something useless, how could you possibly think they
won't do the same to any other facility we come up with? This isn't a
silly issue, it's a practical one. And it's symptomatic of the
prevailing attitude that has led us to be in the situation we are in
today. Now you can write the most wonderful ID imaginable, but if we
chose to not enforce it in the way we've not enforced other aspects of
the protocol, we'll simply be having this conversation all over again
in a couple of years.
--lyndon