-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Alex van den Bogaerdt wrote:
On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 10:00:17AM -0600, Daniel Taylor wrote:
There are value judgments here, and society as a whole is more forgiving
than yourself.
Maybe so, maybe not. You yourself are using a value judgement, one which
could be wrong itself. Perhaps you are more forgiving than society as a
whole, and I am on par.
You'd be amazed the stuff that sets me off.
Alex van den Bogaerdt wrote:
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 01:30:43PM -0700, David MacQuigg wrote:
Interesting problem! The example is very helpful in defining the category
of email we are talking about. How about we call it "Solicited Commercial
Email" or SCE, instead of "cageliner".
no problem here, but ...
This would include mail from
charitable and political organizations asking for donations,
SPAM!
Noncommercial. UNE?
This is a particular category that, as a society, we have decided is
"good" enough to allow interrupting your dinner with a phone call. I
expect that if it comes down to legislation, your inbox will not be
considered more sacred than your dinner hour.
Which society? This is 'not done' over here where I live. And illegal
when using email (not sure about phone).
The United States national "do not call" list legislation specifically
excludes calls for political or charity fundraising purposes. To me that
sends a very clear message on the priorities of our legislators at a
minimum, and by extension their advisors and many of their constituents.
I disagree with this myself, so I continue to avoid the national list.
ads from Walgreens,
SPAM!
On the contrary, I get the Walgreen's ads, but it is because I signed up
for them (with verification in the loop and permission to send e-mail
advertisements). Definitely solicited, and they seem to be rather
careful about how they use their list, as does my local newspaper who
also sends me commercial e-mails.
Ack. If you signed up, then it's solicited. That wasn't clear in the
message I replied to.
But if you gave your email address to your local newspaper in order to
receive "important messages" related to your subscription, I do not
consider their advertisements to be part of the deal.
In both cases the checkboxes related to the different message types were
very clear. I let my local newspaper send me a limited subset of
advertisements as an experiment. So far they are sticking to what they
said they would.
Anyway, we seem to drift further and further away from the true topic
of this list: fighting email forgery using SPF. I think we should not
continue to define semantics of spam, uce, ube, "une" and such here.
Ah, but there is a relevant point to this.
SPF as a technical measure helps separate good actors from bad actors up
front. In fact I consider SPF or similar sender authorisation to be a
minimal necessary precondition to building a reputation system, and
obvious attempts to bypass or dilute such a system to be just cause for
refusing to accept delivery of e-mail.
Mind you, business considerations prevent me from being so draconian at
work as I might prefer, but on my personal domain....
- --
Daniel Taylor VP Operations Vocal Laboratories, Inc.
dtaylor(_at_)vocalabs(_dot_)com http://www.vocalabs.com/
(952)941-6580x203
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFFzLJr8/QSptFdBtURAs+pAJwMsBlXrkbUhD81qaDqO7anq6s3dACePBV7
4hK2G/1R5KeyoYfgk5iNsAA=
=R7R1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=735