Re: [Asrg] Re: Why SPF?

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

rogerk at queernet.org wrote:
> If I've consented to have someone call me by phone, for instance,
> it's none of my business which phone they use.

  Yes, it is.

  You can demand that they do *anything* as a requirement for you to
listen to them.  They don't have to follow your instructions if they
don't want to talk to you.

  This is called "mutual consent".

  Your position appears to be that you don't want to impose such
restrictions, and therefore you don't think anyone else should impose
such restrictions, either.

  This is called "imposing your restrictions on other people".

  In contrast, my position is one of mutual consent.  If two parties
agree to communicate, I really don't care how they do it, or what
hoops they force each other to jump through.  That's *their* problem,
and doesn't affect me.

  This is also called "freedom to choose".

  Alan DeKok.

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