WHOSE SUPPOSED RIGHTS ARE YOU TRYING TO PROTECT HERE, ANYHOW?
The users, as stated in the charter (emphasis added):
"The work of the ASRG will also include investigating techniques to
evaluate the usefulness and cost of proposed solutions. Usefulness is
described by the effectiveness, accuracy, and incentive structure of the
system. The cost of the system refers to the burden imposed on USERS and
operators of the communications system. "
I think it makes sense to put priority rights to those who are paying the
bills... and that's the recipients. They should have the power to turn
off such
bulky and unwanted crap, ESPECIALLY given the fact that they typically are
trying to work around limited-size ISP-provided inboxes and to keep them from
overflowing and bouncing the mail they DO want to receive.
Your underlying assumption is that spam will persist being HTML encoded.
No. I think that INITIALLY, spam is going to stay HTML-burdened (and a result,
nearly all of it would be trashed if sent to permission-list-protected
recipients). After some time, spammers will realize that HTML-burdening their
spam is the 'kiss of death' and they'll stop doing that.
I do not believe that it will take spammers too long to switch to plain
ASCII.
Agreed. And once they do that:
1) Their spam will be less effective;
2) their spam will be more easily dealt with by content filters;
3) their spam will be something like a QUARTER or less of the volume it is
today, reducing both bandwidth and storage costs all along the delivery route.
Sounds like a win-win deal to me.
Gordon Peterson http://personal.terabites.com/
1977-2002 Twenty-fifth anniversary year of Local Area Networking!
Support the Anti-SPAM Amendment! Join at http://www.cauce.org/
12/19/98: Partisan Republicans scornfully ignore the voters they "represent".
12/09/00: the date the Republican Party took down democracy in America.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg