I am very disturbed by an undercurrent on this discussion group
regarding whether ISPs should be forced to accept email traffic against
their will.
1) I have stated before that I have no objection to people who wish to
view infomercial channels all day long. I also have no objection to
people who wish to set up ISPs with no inbound filtering, or those who
would subscribe to such an ISP.
2) There are some people, however, for whom this freedom of choice is
unappealing. They appear to be demanding the thinly veiled
nationalization of *ALL ISPs*, and *FORCING* them to accept email
traffic aginst their will. Assuming that the government survives the
riots in the streets, that idea still won't work. Up till now, only
geeks have used ssh to access mailboxes at remote sites. It wouldn't
take much for someone to write an installer and a front-end that is
usable by average users. Then they can access filtered POPmail inboxes
across the ocean just as easily as unfiltered inboxes across the street.
And of course, there's always webmail. Is the government supposed to
erect "the great firewall of China" to combat this ?
There comes a point where one has to draw a line in the sand. I don't
demand to control what other people can get in their inboxes if it's
legal. I do not recognize anyone else's alleged "right" to force
anything into my inbox. Can we have agreement on this basic principle ?
--
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