gep2(_at_)terabites(_dot_)com wrote:
But a united front from the internet groups behind a common definition of
what levels of consent must be required would help.
I've put in my previous message some of what *I* consider key.
I don't think there's any need whatsoever to create a mechanism to tell
senders
what their permission level might or might not be. I think they should feel
OBLIGED to mail at the minimum, least-common-denominator level until the
RECIPIENT tells them otherwise (and authorizes such, too, via their
permissions
list). This is one way to keep senders at arm's length, AND to let the
Congress
and DMA to know that they MUST contact the recipient for "extra" permissions
FIRST if they want more than just minimal level of access to the recipient's
inbox.
There might we a useful purpose to create mechanisms for exchanging
consent so this way we can have a standardized format for an audit trail
that can prove "opt-in".
Actually, I think there's significant value in NOT making this easy, if for no
other reason than to strongly encourage senders to NOT "push the envelope" of
what they can get away with. I'd like to see mailings kept to the simpler, less
wasteful, small and universal formats to the degree practical.
Also, it's important to recognize that "proving opt-in" means *nothing* because
the recipient needs to have the right AT ANY TIME to change their permissions
associated with the specific sender (to more, or less, permissive). Just
because the recipient arguably once "opted in" doesn't mean that the sender has
the continuing permission to send to them in any given format, or even for that
matter to send to them anything at all.
I also think that recipients need to have the ability to change their
permissions according to just about ANY criteria they wish, or might adopt in
the future, and this suggests AWAY from any kind of standardized list of
understood "standard permissions".
I firmly believe that recipients MUST continue to hold all the cards here, and
that they have ALL the power to accept or deny anything at all and for any
reason they choose, now or whenever they change their mind.
How would you suggest that recipients would go about granting and
denying permissions (or consent) if there are no standards in place? Are
you suggesting that the receiver simply chooses not to receive certain
kinds of email and that email starts to bounce? If so, there is still a
need to have some form of a format or standard in place that the
receiver can use to communicate his consent decisions to his MUA, MTA or
ISP.
Yakov
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg