While this may be important enough to have some discusion on the
general IETF list, I would point out that there does exist an IETF
working group in this area: RUN, Responsible Use of the Net
<http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/run-charter.html>. This working
group produced RFC 2635 which was adopted by the IETF Consensus
process.
Donald
From: "Robert G. Ferrell" <root(_at_)rgfsparc(_dot_)cr(_dot_)usgs(_dot_)gov>
Message-Id:
<200006191537(_dot_)KAA13415(_at_)rgfsparc(_dot_)cr(_dot_)usgs(_dot_)gov>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 10:37:35 -0500 (CDT)
Reply-To: "Robert G. Ferrell"
<root(_at_)rgfsparc(_dot_)cr(_dot_)usgs(_dot_)gov>
To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
X-Loop: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
It is also impossible to differentiate between so-called
spam and expressions of a personal political, social or
artistic nature.
Herein lies one of the major issues that ought to be sorted out before
anyone takes any steps to regulate spam. What is spam, exactly? There seems
to be a wide variety of notions as to what constitutes a spam. Some
people define it in its original context; i.e., unsolicited commercial
email. Others broaden the definition to include offensive or off-topic
remarks on a public or private list. Still others would include *any* email
they didn't want to receive as 'spam.' It would be extremely challenging and
largely useless to attempt to regulate what you can't even categorize,
methinks.
RGF
Robert G. Ferrell
========================================
Who goeth without humor goeth unarmed.
========================================