Subject: [Asrg] Position paper, in zipped HTML

From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 19:54:32 -0800

Where there is a geek, there is a way.

Here is the position paper in gziped HTML, so you don't even have to mess
with pdf.

I really wish we had put a packed encoding into the html spec, it was one of
the major oversights.

	Phill

---

From: "Chris Lewis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 12:51:19 -0500

Comments:

In the Second Order section, the comments regarding blacklists are 
misleading, oft times factually incorrect, and clearly biased.  On the 
contrary, most blacklists, especially the reputable ones (and there are 
many), contain dispute/retest mechanisms and contact addresses. List all 
of China - well, why not, if the person running the MTA has no 
correspondants in China, why shouldn't they?  BL "Listing all of UUNET?" 
- flat out false.  No even remotely respectable blacklist has ever done so.

[Oft-stated rumours and claims, but turn out to be just plain wrong. 
Tend to have their origin in journalists being mislead by spammers.]

Re: Email Infrastructure [re: X.400 and UUCP]: "apparently technically 
sophisticated enough to use email but not sophisticated enough to use 
1980s technology.".  Ahem.  Unnecessary, gratuitous (and IMHO 
uneducated) insult.  There are many reasons why X.400/UUCP are still in 
use.  Several of them good technical ones.  Even with SMTP, there are 
many instances where, for example, active callback verification methods 
cannot work.

Re: Opt-out lists.  You skipped several arguments: if every company in 
the US spammed you just once over the course of a year, you'd have to 
opt-out 650 times per day. I don't think that's sustainable. Secondly, 
especially, at that volume, why should the onus be on the recipient to 
expend effort?  I didn't ask for it, why do I need to ask _not_ to get 
it?  Depriving the spammers of excuses doesn't stop them spamming. Even 
the DMA's eMPS system was a joke.

Last paragraph in that section makes no logical sense.

I think the comments about "fake originator" addresses isn't in the 
least sustainable by thorough statistical investigation.  90%?  Not in 
our feed.

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg