Subject: CAUCE and DMA

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 12:14:43 -0400

A couple of people have pointed out in private email that I should
not have posted my understanding of CAUCE's relationship with DMA
without substantiation.

Personally I don't see how such things can ever be substantiated
anyway - it seems to be the nature of politics that you rarely 
have verifiable information about anything.

However the information I have is approximately a year old. 
And it is of course possible that the information I was told was wrong,
or that I misinterpreted it, or that the CAUCE folks have backed off
from supporting the DMA in the past year.

Naturally I hope I was wrong or misinformed about CAUCE - because
I would far rather believe that they're on the side of good.  But
I've seen too much dirty stuff in general to be that optimistic
about *any* organization.

In any case, I hope that net-knowledgable US citizens will *personally* 
read this bill (make sure you read the latest amended version) and 
*personally* let their congresscritters understand how they feel about 
the bill itself and spam in general.

Even if CAUCE is well-intentioned, don't trust them to deliver the message
alone.

Keith

---

From: "Kurt Weber" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 12:59:12 -0500

To be perfectly honest, the relation between CAUCE (Coalition Against
Unsolicited Commercial Email) and the DMA (Direct Marketers' Assocation)
makes perfect sense.  Spam has a negative effect on profits of members of
the DMA, because DMA members do their business through postal mail.
Therefore, elimination of spam makes perfect sense for the DMA.

Regards,
Kurt Weber
[email-masked]
ROW Software and Web Design
http://www.rowsw.com