Re: [Asrg] 3. Requirements and what is spam

[Yakov Shafranovich <research@solidmatrix.com>]

Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 November 2003 11:41, Jon Kyme wrote:
<snip>
> > It might also be instructive to check out the archives of this list.
> > Here's a good one:
> > http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/asrg/current/msg07341.html
> >
> >
> > Spam definitions? No thanks. We have a "consent-based communication" model.
> > Spam is the other stuff :-)
>
> Fair enough.  Established order has spoken and dissension is unwelcome.  The 
> message is clear, and I will act accordingly.
<grin>I did not think we became communist yet, at least I haven't 
noticed all the extra perks party members supposed to get</grin>

In any case, the reason why we are trying to steer away from this, is 
because both inside and outside the group, definitions vary. Your 
original definition concentrated on the "unsolicited" aspect of spam, on 
the other hand the DMA's definition of spam is forged email. A consensus 
on what is spam exactly has not been reached by anyone inside or outside 
the group.

Additionally, as I stated in my other message, your definition is 
basically "unsolicited" which looks at the email from the individual 
users' perspective. "Bulk" on the other hand, is what bothers most ISPs, 
not unsolicited. Both must be taken into the account, and your 
definition is basically half of the ASRG working definition.

Yakov




_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg