On Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:50:02 -0400, L.D. Best wrote: > Sam,
> Is it censorship when an ISP like mine screens for viruses and refuses > to save infected e-mail received to my pop3 files on the server? In a > way I consider that to be a fact -- my ISP is denying me access to > something someone is sending me. Just because the majority of the > people using the ISP are also using Windows software, a few are using > Linux, and only one is using DOS, is it "fair" to prevent the sole DOS > user, on a multi-county multi-state ISP, from getting virus infected > e-mail that can't possibly hurt me? This might not be fair to you as far as your own individual interests in the matter are concerned. I can very well understand why you might have an interest in knowing who is sending you infected mail so that you might be able to communicate with them and advise them to clean up their computers. On the other hand, the policy of your ISP seems to be consistent with the widely accepted philosophy which holds that we should always endeavor to do whatever is the best thing to benefit the greatest number of people, regardless of the adverse effects on certain individuals. (BTW, one of the best known proponents of this philosophy is John Stewart Mill. I know that many of us including you and myself will disagree with much of what he has to say.) By screening for viruses your ISP is preventing many others from becoming infected. Of course it would be better if the other users would simply practice safe hex, but they won't. Therefore your ISP feels that it is their burden to watch over whatever it considers to be in the best interests of its subscribers under the circumstances. > And are you certain that the daemon messanger was from Glenn's ISP and > not yours? It seems strange that your outgoing stuff is the only thing > anyone has seen being dumped into the bit bucket... could be > coincidence. Yes, it was from Glenn's ISP. Both Glenn and myself are convinced of this fact. > Why don't you try using the subject with one of the accepted alternative > spellings like "Oshama" or Bin Lauden vs. Bin Laden and see what > various ISPs do with the message. If you find a place where you get > kickbacks that can be duplicated, try narrowing it down by omitting a > single element of the subject ... send with Osama bin or bin lauden or > whatever and see if somewhere someone's fear is operating to "protect > the users" from exposure. I would like to do that; however, most would-be recipients would feel annoyed with receiving silly little test messages to which they might feel obligated to respond. > You could make quite a "game" out of messing with the software that is > "shielding" the reticent sites. For me it would be a fun game to play, but most others would not be interested in playing it with me, IMHO. Sam Heywood -- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser - http://arachne.cz/
