Subject: Re: namedroppers, continued

From: "Dr. Jeffrey Race" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 16:59:46 -0500

On Tue, 07 Jan 2003 15:26:55 -0500, [email-masked] wrote:
>The trick here is to remember that except for the relative few spammers that
>are advocating a religious/political/philosophical viewpoint (a la "Uncertainty
>Principle is Untenable!"), the spammers *WANT* you to be able to contact them
>via *some* means - they can't extract money

See <www.camblab.com/nugget/extermin.htm>

If the contact data are invalid, report to RIR or to ICANN.  They
are obliged to correct the data.

Jeffrey Race

---

From: Vernon Schryver <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 15:59:05 -0700 (MST)

> From: "Dr. Jeffrey Race" <[email-masked]>

> ...

No, contrary to the common hope to extract petty vengence from spammers,
they are merely forced to provide contact data that is not obviously
bogus.  Worse, by forcing spammers to be less creative, these efforts
make them harder to recognize.  A random name and address from the
nearest phone book is not readily identifiable, unlike the false names
previously favored by many spammers.  Both sorts of domain contacts
are useless for contacting spammers.

Besides, domain contact addresses generally unrelated and are
certainly irrelevant to the contact addresses for collecting money
in almost all spam.

Vernon Schryver    [email-masked]

---

From: Vernon Schryver <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 15:59:05 -0700 (MST)