On Wed, 7 May 2003 10:29:54 +0200
Hadmut Danisch <hadmut(_at_)danisch(_dot_)de> wrote:
<<< 550 5.7.1 REJECT go away: Sent to DCC
If you read the web page of DCC, then this is not based on certain
words contained in the message, but on checksums.
In practice Vernon is more generous with his definitions regarding what
gets matched and what gets reported than the DCC pages report. This is
his perogative as a private mail system operator.
This particular message was reported to the DCC as being Spam. So
every customer of DCC will not receive that message anymore.
There is not requirement for sites running DCC to use its as absolute
spam markers. Most that I've seen use DCC as a hinting mechanism, one
factor among several, not an absolute flag.
From my point of view this is private censorship and that's why I
don't like those systems.
I do not think that censorship means what you think it does. Please
check a good dictionary.
What are you saying here?
That someone should not elect what mail they are willing to receive or
not?
That someone should not state the criteria on which they decide what
mail to receive or not?
That someone should not state the actual decisions they made regarding
mail they receive?
That someone should not listen to the criteria or decisions another
makes regarding their mail, and then factor that into their own mail
policies in whatever manner they wish?
There are slippery free speech issues in here.
--
J C Lawrence
---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
claw(_at_)kanga(_dot_)nu He lived as a devil, eh?
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg