-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Many of us do.
- -
James D. Wilson, CCDA, MCP
"non sunt multiplicanda entia praeter necessitatem"
William of Ockham (1285-1347/49)
- -----Original Message-----
From: BENHAM TIMOTHY JAMES [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2000 4:16 PM
To: James Wilson
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: CP All these silly filtering proposals...
I wouldn't have thought you cpunks would wait for an ISP to change
their policies. :-) Surely you're all running a real OS... :)
Tim
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> The problem is that most ISP's nowadays either don't allow shell
> accounts or don't allow Sendmail pipes to user defined programs.
> Brightmail seems to have a good rep though, and it is free for the
> individual user.
>
> - -
> James D. Wilson, CCDA, MCP
> "non sunt multiplicanda entia praeter necessitatem"
> William of Ockham (1285-1347/49)
>
>
>
> - -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of BENHAM TIMOTHY JAMES
> Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 11:52 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: CP All these silly filtering proposals...
>
>
> I don't think that the real potential of subject line based
filtering
> has been seen by all participants. There is no need to change the
> existing backbone because the process can be implemented purely by
> local action. Each user who didn't want to see spam or clueless
posts
> (at least clueless posts from newbies) would filter their own email
> feed.
>
> On many systems this can be achieved by a simple procmail recipe; on
> some it might be directly supplied by email user agents (on usenet
trn
> will do the trick, for example).
>
> All that is required is that a critical mass of particpants
> voluntarily decide
> to follow the convention.
>
> Of course if operators wish to extend the backbone with options for
> a pre-filtered feed, there is no objection to that in principle.
>
> > Without effecting the backbone or implimenting some sort of
regular
> > communications channel between operators (both against the intial
> charter)
> > then all the current proposals are simply bogus.
> >
> > If the basic backbone is altered from its current status then the
> spammers
> > and those opposed to the Cypherpunk credo (and democratic thought
as
> well)
> > will have won. It is a an overt admission that speech must be
> moderated
> > and that poeple in general, and technology in particular, has no
> solution.
> >
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGP 6.0.2
> Comment: I live for the sound ... of nothing but net
>
> iQA/AwUBOTZt0iavYwibXjmcEQL5AACg3YwC9kuw/PBYWS4iGPrAmxLkyGIAoKlm
> mE5oHa/R77/A5skQHqoZf6lX
> =wYih
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.0.2
Comment: I live for the sound ... of nothing but net
iQA/AwUBOT0LbyavYwibXjmcEQKBDQCg4LeNu41HJgkbM9JKpCVg2PGJdP4AnjCv
7ZOBJnYjEU7liIwUlnIW4lPq
=uftp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
