Laird Breyer <laird(_at_)lbreyer(_dot_)com> wrote:
On Apr 03 2006, John Levine wrote:
Not really. I get spam complaints all the time for mail from lists
that I know perfectly well that they signed up for and confirmed.
"Oh, I don't want that any more." For the ones that aren't totally
redacted, my setup turns them into unsubs so they don't get any more
mail for that particular list, but I don't think it's fair to count
mail as spam if it depends on reading the recipient's mind in
real-time.
Isn't that perilously close to saying that if they decided something
in the past, they're not allowed to change their mind?
No. If someone asked for something, they're certainly entitled to
change their mind and request (and enforce) not getting it. They're
not entitled to change their mind and decide they never asked for it.
My position is that there's absolutely nothing wrong with the "spam
is what I say is spam" definition. It's workable, provided you keep
spam filtering at the ends of the network, ie the desktop.
You can't actually _filter_ according to that rule.
The issue is feedback. You don't want the spam complaints because
you don't consider yourself these people's spam filter.
It has nothing to do with spamming. Unsubscribes and spam complaints
are not the same thing. Spam complaints about solicited email are
bogus, incorrect, and wrong.
[testing]
I don't agree that perturbing the system is necessary, however.
Describe how you'd test greylisting without perturbing the system.
Seth
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg