And thus in a proposal such a philosophy should be explicitly stated and that
would satisfy the requirement.
-e
On Monday, October 27, 2003 11:07 AM, Jonathan A. Zdziarski
[SMTP:jonathan(_at_)nuclearelephant(_dot_)com] 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.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg