>>>>> "D" == Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
D> About the only legitimate complaint you have, assuming
D> canada.com discloses in the TOS ...
Which they do not. If they do, I cannot find it.
If they had a policy statement saying "we monitor your email and
filter what we believe is spam" which then defines "spam" and further
promises, as their privacy statement does, never to disclose the
contents of my email to any human eyes without a supoena, then I'd be
happy. I'd know where I stand and if I discovered they'd banned BCE
(their competitor) from sending me contract offers, I'd have recourse
to recompense.
I'd be happier still if they disclosed the regex's they used, but
that's wishing for too much.
D> ... is that the filtering is overbroad. In a few years of
D> experience with canada.com, I have found it to snare only spam.
Precisely my point: How about the one's you have not found? How do
you know the filtering is overbroad? My spam cans collect upwards of
a hundred spams a day through this account, so the filtering doesn't
work as advertised, so what is it they are snaring? The simple fact
is, we _don't_ know, _and_ they make _no_ promises.
So, to summarize then, you have _no_ objections to my secretly rifling
through my neighbour's post _providing_ I then hand-deliver his post
for free? Remind me never to share an apartment block with you.
--
Gary Lawrence Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> TeleDynamics Communications Inc
Business Innovations Through Open Source Systems: http://www.teledyn.com
"Computers are useless. They can only give you answers."(Pablo Picasso)
