Anti spam solutions

[Peter L. Peres]

On Wed, 8 Oct 2003, Ralph Doncaster wrote:

> On Wed, 8 Oct 2003, Peter L. Peres wrote:
>
> > You are going to hate this but drm and a democratic router policy voting
> > system would fix this. The majority of users do not want spam, and they
> > can force their ISPs and everyone whom they *do* *buy* bandwidth from to
> > impose and maintain spam blocking rules. None of the major isps blocks
> > spam at the routing level now (they should imho).
>
> The resource requirements to implement it compared to regular IP routing
> make such a plan completely impractical.

I thought it's easier to stem the flow at the bottleneck as opposed to
when it is raining down on everyone. I did not say it would be cheap or
easy. Someone has to pay for it too. Tax money probably, after enough
people get sufficiently upset about spam and viruses. Which they about are
now imho. I'd like to see what the US Congress comes up with wrt spam.

They are trying to do things about it now and they started being fought by
spammers, which means that they are making head of sorts, else the
spammers would not bother to sue them imho. I hope that they will make it
a federal felony to opt in someone into a list without his written
explicit consent (clicking OK on a webforum membership request won't do
- it would have to be a separate dedicated message with standard
pre-determined wording, and short i.e. "You hereby aggree to receive
promotional email from XXXX{a specific site or business} regarding
YYYY{a specific set of topics} by ZZZ{method: email, wap push, etc}
OK/NO" and there should be NO default option. I.e. the user will have to
deliberately select one then click OK).

Peter
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml