On Sun, 6 Apr 2003 09:31:49 -0600 (MDT)
Vernon Schryver <vjs(_at_)calcite(_dot_)rhyolite(_dot_)com> wrote:
From: "Jon Kyme" <jrk(_at_)merseymail(_dot_)com> ... > - bulk mail is any
set
of 50 or more messages that are substantially > identical as
determined by a reasonable person.
Why 50? why not 100, 45, or (my personal favourite) "2 or more".
I'd go with 2. Most of the thousands of operators of DCC clients seem
to like 20-50. However, some contributors to this mailing list have
insisted that 500 is barely "bulk."
Given that an increasing percentage of spam (its over 15% for me) is
being mailmerged individually to the recipient, I suspect the
description "bulk" for spam at the payload/protocol level is going to be
of short lived use.
I'm not sure what you mean by "payload/protocol level" in this context.
However, I'm not convinced that simply mailmerged (or VERPed) messages
would be considered as "substantially" non-identical by a reasonable
person.
Neither is it clear that a recipient must be unable make a *personal*
*judgement* of "bulkiness" based on a small sample of the message set.
Accordingly, I don't share your pessimism regarding the continued
usefulness of the term "bulk".
This thread seems to have moved (I hope) from "define spam" towards "define
consent".
This will be, I hope, much more productive - and amenable to research.
I don't believe that it's neccessary for the "consent-state" of a message
to be
defined at any time before the recipient sees it (although it may be). It
follows
that consent may be asserted by the recipient based on the intrinsic
characteristics
of the communication rather than on characteristics of a "message set"
about which the recipient will have little, or no, knowledge.
--
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg