On 02/26/03 11:46pm you wrote... >> ...we as a group do care about how the data we provide our users is >> used. The best we can do is to make it as accurate as possible, and >> be available to help those who need a professional opinion. > >Your company makes spyware--no offense intended, and I agree with your >stance that you guys are not responsible for the uses made of your >tool and see Cybersitter's reasonable application in some home and >business environments.
This is incorrect. We do not make spyware. That is not the purpose and never has been. We make content management software. It can log activity or not. The vast majority of our customers do not maintain logs at all. >Declude, by design, is the opposite of spyware, as it is intended to >protect end users from UNsolicited, UNwanted Internet-based >communication, and in turn from the consequences of such communication >being presumed as solicited. Declude-tagged data, *as* suspected spam, >CANNOT be used to implicate an end user. It's not an ethics issue; you >just can't do it. It's insane, backward, punishably ignorant to even >contemplate it. It's like...using a history of porn surfing as proof >that someone isn't into porn! Declude by design, is a TOOL. The user can make it behave any way they want to. We can make it block ALL porn, not just unsolicited porn. And we do. >> I am willing to bet that the employee in question was not fired >> solely based on information provided by an anti-spam program...It is >> quite possible he just needed the evidence. > >Porn messages held as suspected spam are not evidence of a porn habit, >even in relative quantity. Really, now: if they really need more >evidence, track the *outgoing* mail in combination with their existing >web monitoring (though this would be unlikely to trap much), and track >often non-suspect "plain brown wrapper" e-mail receipts for credit >card transactions. How could web monitoring over a month or more >*possibly* be insufficient evidence, anyway? Who said they had to be suspected spam? We have received hundreds on inquiries about blocking adult material whether it is spam or not. This is a hot segment of the market right now. A lot of spam is tolerated. Porn is not. What they may be evidence of is violation of company policies. They may be unsolicited, may be not. Doesn't matter whether the guy has a porn habit or not. If he is receiving inappropriate material, and if the employer has good reason that some of it is not unsolicited as you claim it all must be, the employer is perfectly within his rights, and possibility even obligated to fire the guy. --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
