Re: [Asrg] SICS

[gep2 at terabites.com]

>>> Obviously we want to reduce spam volume.  My approach is all about that.

>> From your arguments, I have the strong impression that your approach
is entirely unrelated to the problem being discussed in this
thread. 

>> Your goal is to reduce the number of spam messages visible to end
users. 

That's part of it, but only a part.

Let's not confuse spam QUANTITY (number of messages) with spam VOLUME (number of 
messages * average size of a spam message).

> That's a good goal, but has nothing to do with reducing the
amount of data processed by ISPs who operate SMTP server farms for
their customers. Let's not mix up the issues.

I disagree.

First, if we were ever to reach the state where ZERO (or near zero) spam 
messages reached end recipients, then spamming would be 100% without profitable 
return to the spammers... it wouldn't continue for long under such conditions.

Second, if spammers get the message that spam containing attachments or that is 
HTML-burdened has GREATLY REDUCED chances of being delivered and read, then 
they're likely to stop using those approaches (and those approaches hugely 
inflate the size of most spam messages).  Thus, a likely HUGE reduction in spam 
volume (including, in particular, that which ISPs receive and process).  

Gordon Peterson                  http://personal.terabites.com/
1977-2002  Twenty-fifth anniversary year of Local Area Networking!
Support free and fair US elections!  http://stickers.defend-democracy.org
12/19/98: Partisan Republicans scornfully ignore the voters they "represent".
12/09/00: the date the Republican Party took down democracy in America.



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