ietf-asrg
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Asrg] The "Human-Shield" effect; the need for end-user control

2003-03-23 15:33:07
I see your point. Yes, possibly consent by whitelisting is not "clear 
consent" but its best somebody can express in technical terms. I do 
understand though that even after whitelisting somebody may want to run 
some extra filters, but I'd expect this to be rare and when they violate 
your "consent" and send you stock tips instead of anti-spam technology 
letter, then possibly this would mean end of presumed white-listing 
consent... At that point you would go and modify your preferences.

On Sun, 23 Mar 2003, Kee Hinckley wrote:

At 1:50 AM -0800 3/23/03, william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net wrote:
Clear Consent is when end-user said he wants to receive email from you
(whitelisting of email address or domain). Clear No Consent is when user
specifically said he does not want to receive email from you (blacklisting).
Specifying of other mail filters are consent by user to use specific
technology to filter out email.

I think that defining consent in terms of filters is very confusing 
and inaccurate.

If I consent to receive a newsletter about books from Example, and 
they start sending me a newsletter about Toys, then they haven't 
listened to my request.  That has absolutely nothing to do with 
whether I've whitelisted newsletter(_at_)example(_dot_)com(_dot_)

I'm not sure if you are really combining whitelisting with that 
concept of consent, or just using the same term in a different place, 
but I think it would be a good idea not to use the term in both 
places.

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg