North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful
- From: Jay R. Ashworth
- Date: Tue Oct 28 15:13:51 1997
On Tue, Oct 28, 1997 at 11:38:15AM -0800, Rik Schneider wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Oct 1997, J.D. Falk wrote:
> > On Oct 28, Daniel Karrenberg <Daniel.Karrenberg@ripe.net> wrote:
> > > Some of them are esentially centralsied methods of controlling Internet
> > > content. Paul's anti-spam feed for instance prevents users of some
> > > providers from seeing spam. The user has no choice; they cannot opt to
> > > receive spam other than by switching to another provider. Even worse:
> > > they may not even be aware that they are "missing" some content.
> > Users should be aware if their ISP is blocking something,
> > no matter what it is. However, that's not a technical or
> > operational issue...I'm not sure what category it is.
> How about "ethical issue"
Not at all, Rik. The only time it becomes an ethical issue is if you
_lie_ to your paying customers about what you are doing. As long as
you tell the customers what you're doing, then they have the option to
vote with their wallets. There are better than 4000 IAPs in this
country; no one has any excuse for limiting how those people can
operate their business on this particular point on the grounds of 'free
The first amendment only limits the _government_, anyway; this has been
the topic of much case law.
Jay R. Ashworth firstname.lastname@example.org
Member of the Technical Staff Unsolicited Commercial Emailers Sued
The Suncoast Freenet "Pedantry. It's not just a job, it's an
Tampa Bay, Florida adventure." -- someone on AFU +1 813 790 7592