asrg(_at_)bobf(_dot_)frankston(_dot_)com wrote:
The responses I got (only 2) remind me of the concept that free speech is
only allowed as long as you don't abuse it. For this list I must point
translate this phrase to point out that restricting free speech to what is
allowed ain't no free speech.
Free speech is a totally separate topic from establishing a consent
framework for communication. In addition, any idea that "free speech"
is some kind of "right" is directly contradictory to establishing a
consent framework for communication.
That is, if I don't consent to listening to your "free speech", you
have NO right to force me to listen to it. So I've allegedly
"restricted" your "free speech", but that's *your* problem, not mine.
I don't really think I need to respond to the suggestions that we should
limit email to approved messages via approved channels containing approved
content
If "approved" means "consented to by the recipient", then it would
appear you're opposed to the charter goals of establishing a consent
framework for communication.
If "approved" means "some third party to the communication", then I
would agree that such approval is contradictory to the charter goals.
Static IP addresses are bug. But putting that aside, Requiring me to only
send mail through approved channels is like requiring that I ask permission
to use free speech and file with all the authorities so I can be punished
for saying the wrong things. Telling me what path I'm allowed to use is not
just restrictive, it's not the Internet!
So you don't consent to my declaration that I consent to accepting
email only from a whitelist (i.e. particular path). Why does that
make me nervous?
To respond to another letter I don't need, I don't want an ISP and I must
not be required to have an ISP any more than I must not be required to send
my phone calls over the legacy PSTN for no purpose other than creating a
billable entity out of nothing - I just want to have my packets find a path.
You're stuck on the concept that the only consent is the consent of
the sender. If you want the recipient to accept your messages, you
MUST establish a mutually agreeable framework: i.e. mutual consent.
Alan DeKok.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg