I suspect that if we are not even able to agree on a definition of
spam, there will never be much efficient anti-spam research by our
group.
The world hasn't agreed on a definition of spam in 20 years, and I see
no reason to think that anything has changed that would make it
possible to do so now.
Fortunately, all of the popular definitions (UBE, UCE, UBCE, mail
recipients don't want) in practice tend to describe roughly the same
mail. So my suggestion is that documents discussing anti-spam
techniques say which definition they're using, if it matters, and
leave it at that. Readers specifically don't get to complain that
it's the wrong definition.
R's,
John
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg