Re: [Asrg] 0. General - Mailing list summary...

["Alan DeKok" <aland at ox.org>]

Seth Breidbart <sethb@panix.com> wrote:
> Your inability to determine that the usage was legitimate does not
> affect its legitimacy, although it can affect your behavior.

  If my MTA can't tell it's legitimate, then I don't really care about
statements you make on a mailing list claiming that such messages are
legitimate.  Those statements are irrelevant, unimportant, and
completely pointless.

  To re-iterate: I'm interested in what information MTA's can use, and
what decisions they can come to.  Theoretical issues of legitimacy are
a waste of time.

  You're stuck on the idea that I've somehow labelled your messages
illegitimate, and you feel bad that I've made a value judgement about
your mail.  I haven't.  I've explained why I haven't.  Get over it.

  I've labelled those messages as "my MTA can't tell they're
legitimate", and I don't really care about your opinion, unless you're
willing to publish your opinions in a form my MTA can use.  Get it?

> I believe that only the recipient's criteria for _determining what to
> do_ matter in _what the recipient does_.  That does NOT affect whether
> or not a message _actually is_ spam.

  To quote someone else: That depends on what the meaning of "is" is.

  You're interested in philosophical discussions, and steadfastly
refuse to address the only issue: what information is available in the
network.

  MTA's don't read mailing lists.  Nothing else is relevant.

  Alan DeKok.

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