-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Franz J Ehrengruber (iptelenet) wrote:
| John Glube wrote:
|
|>There is a significant distinction between
|>unsolicited bulk email and solicited bulk email.
|
| In my opinion there is NO difference between unsolicited bulk email and
| solicited bulk email. Both are SPAM as far as I'm concerned, and any IP
| address sending spam and is listed in any of BL's we are using, is being
| blocked by our anti spam policy implementation. Our policy works - 95% of
| spam has been eliminated!
|
| Franz.
| Network Administrator
| IP.Telenet
Msrs. Ehrengruber & Goodman:
By your arguments, it would appear that neither of you is particularly
connected with the fiscal portions of a business that relies on the
Internet for its income. Those of us who do are quite serious about
a lack of authentication, spam, joe-jobs, and general criminal behaviour
making a medium that is _irreplacable_ for our livelyhoods unusable by
anyone for any purpose.
There is, at this time, no medium that provides a notification mechanism
as widespread, easy to use, lightweight, and high bandwidth as e-mail.
If I at times seem rude, brusque, or generally offensive when brushing
off the concerns of people who consider it good form to have businesses
shut down for sending them materials that _they_requested_, perhaps
it is because I like having a roof over my head and food for my kids.
E-mail is my livelyhood.
If you do not wish to recieve e-mail from my company, personally, I
consider you free to blackhole us. The freedom to say what I wish does
not mean anyone has to listen. However, I would greatly appreciate it
if you do not take it upon yourselves to keep others from hearing
us through the most effective medium we have.
We do not use e-mail for marketing up front.
We run a testing service for telecommunication centers and applications.
To do this we have a pool of panelists that we pay to call us and
evaluate the systems under test.
Without e-mail we have no way to let these people know in a timely,
relatively unobtrusive, economical (for all parties) way that there
is work to do, or send them notifications that can effect their
relationship with our service.
Given my druthers I'd have mandatory header authentication
of _all_ 2821 and 2822 headers, cryptographicly signed, with
a wax seal on the crypto signature and stiff penalties for
forging or masquerading as someone you aren't.
I'm not holding my breath.
I'll settle for simple widely deployed systems that at least
can give me an edge over those who would cause problems for
my livelyhood.
- --
Daniel Taylor
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFA0h3Y8/QSptFdBtURAk1+AJ9Ij9/fmy7SkgD/yPB2FwilpNprvgCeIi/4
vWLvRk5F+2dr+IF8AhCA8r8=
=4QW9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----