Re: One SPAM side effect

To: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry at piermont.com>
Subject: Re: One SPAM side effect
From: Dave Crocker <dhc2 at dcrocker.net>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 15:49:19 -0700
Cc: Bob Braden <braden at ISI.EDU>, ietf at ietf.org
In-reply-to: <87adnmo2xe.fsf@snark.piermont.com>
References: <200208161935.TAA29779@gra.isi.edu> <200208161935.TAA29779@gra.isi.edu>
Sender: owner-ietf at ietf.org

At 06:26 PM 8/16/2002 -0400, Perry E. Metzger wrote:

The spammers are destroying the usefulness of enormous amounts of
wonderful infrastructure. Time for everyone to get on the phone with
their congressman and ask them if they are interested in what 98% of
the planet wants or what the Direct Marketing Association wants.

In the form you present it, Perry, this is an incredibly bad suggestion.

What it will most likely do is create a frankly hysterical response from Congress, with the most likely effect being censorship.

Congress does not invent answers.  They ratify them.

A coherent community needs to develop a coherent, workable, useful proposal and THEN contact Congress (if passing laws is required.)

d/


----------
Dave Crocker <mailto:dave at tribalwise.com>
TribalWise, Inc. <http://www.tribalwise.com>
tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.850.1850

References:
- One SPAM side effect
  - From: Bob Braden
- Re: One SPAM side effect
  - From: Perry E. Metzger

Prev by Date: Re: Why Spam is a problem
Next by Date: Re: Why Spam is a problem
Previous by thread: Re: One SPAM side effect
Next by thread: Re: One SPAM side effect
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

Re: One SPAM side effect

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.