Jonathan A. Zdziarski wrote:
Being damaging to anonymity would not be a fatal objection to a proposal.
That a proposal ignores the issue would (IMO) be.
This eliminates all statistical-based filters (Bayesian, Chi-Square,
etc.), which are among the most successful spam tools that exist today,
as the sender's true identity is of no importance to the filter. These
filters are based on the philosophy that all email will continue to be
anonymous and therefore pays attention to the one tell-tale
characteristic of all spams: their content. So I would recommend if
you're going to require that a proposal address the issue of anonymity,
you give the author the ability to suggest that it is ignored by the
filter.
Nothing is cast in stone - the proposal author will point out whether
specific requirements apply to his proposal or not. For example,
creative addressing proposal that was discussed a while back has an
analysis done by the author based on both the requirements document and
the technical considerations document. Whatever did not apply, was
indicated so.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg