Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(April 2001)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: we aren't the enemy, but it's hard to prove it
From: Tom Neff <tneff @ panix . com>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 11:24:55 -0400
To: List-Managers @ greatcircle . com
Cc: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui @ plaidworks . com>, James M Galvin <galvin @ acm . org>
In-reply-to: <B712D042.89C3%chuqui@plaidworks.com>

--On Monday, April 30, 2001 8:18 AM -0700 Chuq Von Rospach 
<chuqui@plaidworks.com> wrote:
> If we could just agree on what spam *IS*, we could solve a lot of these
> problems. Unfortunately, the basic definition of spam is "all the crap I
> don't want to get", and that makes this issue difficult to solve on any
> level.

>From an ISP standpoint, what really matters about spam is the number of 
recipients.  The really noticeable difference between a legitimate mailing 
list and a spam campaign is that the latter is HUGE.  As a matter of 
practice, if you check your sender's relay and you impose a limit (hard, 
agreed-upon or otherwise) on the number of recipients within your domain, 
you can let real lists through while blocking spam campaigns, or so it 
would seem to me.  This doesn't eliminate small scale unwanted email (which 
still fits the purist's definition) but it does eliminate the profit 
motive, which generally works wonders.





Follow-Ups:
References:
Indexed By Date Previous: Iname/mail.com effed up again?
From: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com>
Next: Re: we aren't the enemy, but it's hard to prove it
From: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: we aren't the enemy, but it's hard to prove it
From: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com>
Next: Re: we aren't the enemy, but it's hard to prove it
From: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com