While I know the spam definition question, though in the long term unavoidable,
is a quagmire, let me redirect to something that might not be so intractable.
That is, "what is the problem we're here to fix from an engineering
perspective?"
Some in the anti-spam community have written like they think the problem
is they got a mail they didn't like or didn't ask for, and this is what
must be solved.
Let me express why I think we're here and see if people agree.
1) Unwanted E-mail volume is sufficient to put a major burden on servers
and pipes.
Goal: Reduce the volume so it is a tiny fraction of desired traffic
and thus no longer worthy of engineering notice.
2) Unwanted E-mail volume is sufficent to reduce the signal/noise ratio
in user E-mail boxes, making them of lower utility to their users.
For some users (mostly outside USA), noticeable costs are also
incurred.
Goal: Reduce that volume to minor nuisance level, so that users are
not averse to using E-mail because of it. A S/N of 100 to 1 would
certainly do this, for example.
3) Users are afraid to reveal their E-mail address in public, mostly
because of problem #2.
Goal: Eliminate that fear. May be done by eliminating problem 2, but
there are also other ways to go after this problem.
4) Service providers suffer undue cost handling complaints about mail
which originated from their networks, or didn't originate there but
appeared to originate there.
Goal: Reduce complaint volume to manageable levels.
So while I have done nothing to rigidly define spam, I hope I have stated
why we are here, why people think there is a need to fight it, for
engineering reasons. Is this a better place to start?
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg