Ok, and if you get overloaded with spam then it's only because you're
too poor and unimportant to have a secretary sort through your mail
for you.
Anyhow, you ignored the part about defining what a legitimate
solicitation is, is buying an airline ticket sufficient? etc.
-b
On June 4, 2003 at 16:43 peter(_at_)titankey(_dot_)com (Peter Kay) wrote:
What you say may be true but its way out of scope here. If your
subscribers sign up for email solicitations and that overloads your
infrastructure, you've definitely got some cost recovery to deal with
but we don't have a UBE problem.
-----Original Message-----
From: Barry Shein [mailto:bzs(_at_)world(_dot_)std(_dot_)com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 4:39 PM
To: Peter Kay
Cc: kent(_at_)songbird(_dot_)com; Hallam-Baker, Phillip;
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: [Asrg] Another criteria for "what is spam"...
On June 4, 2003 at 15:53 peter(_at_)titankey(_dot_)com (Peter Kay)
wrote: > Yes but we can't define bulk mailing as spamming.
But we CAN define that > UNSOLICITED bulk email is spamming.
Actually, I'm not that uncomfortable with defining any "bulk
mailing" as spamming.
I realize I won't get consensus on that here.
But then again few of you are ISPs expected to just come up
with the money for resources for every blitz by every fortune
1,000,000 company who decides to unload on their (let's say
for argument's sake) legitimate mailing list hourly.
Special fares at United Airlines? Delta? Wham! Here comes
10,000 msgs you frequent flyers!
Campbell's has a new recipe they want to share? Open wide!
NY Times, Wall St Journal, Motley Fool, Salon, etc want to
send their daily headlines and advertising payload? K'POW!
And don't tell me subscriber fees are supposed to cover this.
There's almost total disconnect as marketeers get savvier
about exploiting this medium.
That's like wishing your property taxes covered the postage
for junk paper mail. What a stupid idea that would be! Or
that there should be no postage paid by magazines because you
subscribed to them.
This exercise is kinda like watching legislators make law,
the OTHER guy's use of tax money is a waste, but MY use of
tax money is essential to civilization!
Replace "tax money" with "ISP's resources" and you've got my
point of view.
This is why, without per-message fees, this system is doomed.
It's just a matter of time.
What we're doing here might postpone doom for a while by
freeing up resources for blessed floods of bull****, and
those are mostly my (and
kindred) resources being freed so I have an interest in that
happening. But in my opinion not too far in the future the
current e-mail architecture will just collapse.
One reason why is because the day you stop or minimize spam
the so-called "legitimate" marketers from those fortune
1,000,000 companies will realize that their message will now
get through and will no longer be confused with those of
total con-men and scams.
And those marketeers actually have money to spend. P&G spends
$3B a year on advertising, etc. Need I go on?
They're just waiting on the sidelines for you to build a
nice, level road for them to drive on, for free.
--
-Barry Shein
Software Tool & Die | bzs(_at_)TheWorld(_dot_)com |
http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice:
617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD
The World | Public Access Internet | Since
1989 *oo*
--
-Barry Shein
Software Tool & Die | bzs(_at_)TheWorld(_dot_)com |
http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD
The World | Public Access Internet | Since 1989 *oo*
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg