On Mon, Apr 14, 2003 at 09:51:30PM -0600, John Fenley wrote
I don't think message rejection should happen untill the end user's
decisions enter into the equasion. Just because everyone agrees, doesn't
mean everyone is right.
If the user is not a geek, and signs on to an ISP that advertises spam
blocking, isn't that enough of a decision ?
Every sender (especially a spammer) should be notified if their
message does not go through.
I don't know if you live in the same ivory tower as Lessig, but you
don't seem to appreciate that spammers are 100%, amoral/immoral, greedy
bastards. They *KNOW* their garbage isn't wanted, and they go to great
lengths to evade blocking. They *DELIBERATELY FORGE RETURN ADDRESSES*
to *AVOID* getting the flames back from unwilling recipients. Bounce
messages will simply bury innocent 3rd-parties under a ton of bounces.
In plain English, this is an ugly/dirty war, and if you insist on
using Marquis of Queensbury rules against a dirty opponent who doesn't,
you will end up losing the war. I don't want to lose the war.
--
Walter Dnes <waltdnes(_at_)waltdnes(_dot_)org>
An infinite number of monkeys pounding away on keyboards will
eventually produce a report showing that Windows is more secure,
and has a lower TCO, than linux.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg