This avowed purpose of this group is researching mechanisms
to express consent.
Well, not if you read the website:
"The purpose of the ASRG is to understand the problem and collectively
propose and evaluate solutions to the problem."
Attempting to discuss definitions of spam isn't just off topic
for this group, it's /expressly/ off topic.
I agree that this has been decided, however I'd also draw your attention to
the website where it also says:
"The Anti-Spam Research Group (ASRG) focuses on the problem of unwanted
email messages, loosely referred to as spam"
From which we must assume that this group exists to research the _whole_ of
the problem not only from the POV of what is practically possible, but also
from the POV of identifying what is and isn't within the scope of the
problem.
The problem I keep seeing here is that there are many facets to this broad
definition, and individual participants generally have particular needs that
reflect only a few of these, so that the situation arises where well meaning
people attempt to steer the whole of the discussion into a single channel of
thought.
I don't believe it is necessary or productive to define spam more closely
than the mission statement, nor to attempt to find a single silver bullet
for what is in fact only a collection of loosely related problems.
d.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg