On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 07:52:10AM -0400, C. Wegrzyn wrote
I keep seeing the statement being made that spam should be returned to
the sender.
It should be rejected is more appropriate. In the case of mainsleaze
spammers-in-pinstripe-suits, the sender is using their own MTA. Most of
the time, however, you have pond-scum using compromised home-users'
machines.
I might suggest something slightly different: why not have it
delivered and marked as SPAM in the Subject line? In this way at
least I can check to see if it really is spam? I'm afraid that if it
is returned and we have false positives some mail might be returned
that I do want to see.
a) Why would I want to wade through 15 megabytes of spam after not
reading my mail for a few days ?
b) My inbox may be the *TARGET* of 15 megs of spam, but it can only
hold 10 megabytes in total... oops.
--
Walter Dnes <waltdnes(_at_)waltdnes(_dot_)org>
Email users are divided into two classes;
1) Those who have effective spam-blocking
2) Those who wish they did
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg