Re: FTC: we need sender authentication before "Do Not Spam" can work

On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 08:12:57PM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> Franz J Ehrengruber (iptelenet) (franz(_at_)iptelenet(_dot_)com) wrote:
> > In my opinion there is NO difference between unsolicited bulk email and
> > solicited bulk email. Both are SPAM as far as I'm concerned,
> The message you are reading right now is solicited bulk e-mail.
> It's being sent to you by the listbox.com mail server, and it's
> also being sent to hundreds, if not thousands, of other people.
> That's what "bulk" means, isn't it?
>
> But it's not spam.
It would be if my partner were also accidently to receive this email. He 
wouldn't know what all this RFC, header, envelope sender bussiness is about
and complain that he is getting junk email in his inbox from some spammer
calling itself listbox.com. He wouldn't take time to read it (who reads 
spam anyway?), he would simply click on the 'make filter' menu option in 
his mta.

Koen

-- 
K.F.J. Martens, Sonologic, http://www.sonologic.nl/
Networking, embedded systems, unix expertise, artificial intelligence.
Public PGP key: http://www.metro.cx/pubkey-gmc.asc
Wondering about the funny attachment your mail program
can't read? Visit http://www.openpgp.org/

-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Send us money!  http://spf.pobox.com/donations.html
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your 
subscription, 
please go to 
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com

pgp5aa5H20vp2.pgp
Description: PGP signature