Subject: RE: [Asrg] ESPC Proposal

From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 16:16:30 -0700

Margaret,

	Please ignore Vernon, he has his own agenda which appears to be
something other than solving the spam problem.

	Accountability is something that work both ways in my view. So long
as we have unaccountable individuals running blacklists and such according
to their own predjudices and caprices there is not much incentive on the
part of bulk emailers to participate. It is impossible for anyone to comply
with rules that change to suit the occasion.

	Of course this is not helped by the fact that the US courts have
facilitated SLAPP suits by some of the spam senders. So the result has been
increasing measures to evade accountability on the part of the blacklists. 

	I note that our own spam filters are blocking my daily notifications
from Ameritrade and BBC News, despite the fact both were opt-in. We really
need a mechanism for communicating the optin to the MTAs.

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

---

From: wayne <[email-masked]>
Date: 26 Apr 2003 19:36:17 -0500

Margaret,
 
 	Please *DO NOT* ignore Vernon, he has done more to eliminate
spam than just about anyone else on this mailing list.  The pointers
he provided are to information provided by a wide variety of people.

> with rules that change to suit the occasion.

Yes, it will be hard for anyone sending large quantities of email to
stay off of every blacklist in the world.  That, however, is
irrelevant.  The major DNSBLs do not change their required standards
of conduct very often and that is why so many receivers of email feel
comfortable using them.  ->*IF*<- the ESPC standard of conduct is
usable by receivers of email, I expect it to be used in conjunction
with other anti-spam systems.  If, on the other hand, it is only
useful to the senders, I expect it to be ignored.

-wayne

---

From: "Chris Lewis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 14:25:20 -0400

> he provided are to information provided by a wide variety of people.

I agree.

I'd also point out that from our perspective, ESPC would not aid 
Roving.com in any way.

We block roving due to spam volumes.  We don't need ESPC to tell us 
which stuff is from roving.com - we already know.

They need to get a better handle on their spamming problem.

>>as we have unaccountable individuals running blacklists

My blacklisting of roving.com is perfectly 100% accountable to both my 
employer and the employer of all of the users.

 >> and such according
>>part of bulk emailers to participate.

There's not much incentive on our part to support and embrace ESPC if 
they insist on spamming.