Ted Hardie <hardie(_at_)qualcomm(_dot_)com> wrote:
Please note that the BoF scheduled for Korea, MARID, has a
very specific topic and that discussion of other spam-related
issues is not appropriate for that session.
While I am _very_ sympathetic to the need to limit the discussion,
I really don't see how anything useful can be accomplished if the
chair rules "principles of spam-abatement" to be irrelevant.
Regardless, "principles of spam-abatement" don't need to be
_discussed_ at this BoF in order to "enlighten" it.
Thus, if Ted meant to indicate such principles shouldn't be discussed
here, I respectfully disagree.
At 3:59 PM -0500 02/26/2004, John Leslie wrote:
I strongly recommend gathering some principles of spam-abatement to
enlighten the spam BOF at IETF-59. (I'd be happy to edit such a
document, but it might be better to chose someone who will attend
IETF-59...
Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch(_at_)muada(_dot_)com> wrote:
If we can communicate the fact that a message is discarded because
it was categorized as spam back to the sender without adverse side
effects, then occasional false positives aren't much of a problem.
--
John Leslie <john(_at_)jlc(_dot_)net>