On 1/16/2005 11:14 AM, "Michael J. Kobb" wrote: >> The problem with this system is it punishes the good: "Prove you did nothing >> wrong". It also makes others responsible, in a way, for your spam problem: "I >> don't want to deal with it so jump through a hoop for my convenience." > > The problem with this interpretation is that it fails to acknowledge that > spam is everybody's problem. It's hardly a chore to reply once to a message > saying "I don't recognize you" to be guaranteed that all your future > messages will be delivered...
I receive up to 100 "legitimate" non-mailing-list messages each day, many of them from people with whom I've never previously corresponded who happen to be asking for help or a response. If every time I replied to one of these individuals I had to respond to a "challenge" message, not only would it be a chore but it would take a significant chunk of otherwise productive time out of my day. As John pointed out, such systems make others responsible for your spam problem. I've been careful about where I use my "real" email addresses, I've got good server-side spam filters set up, and I've taken other anti-spam precautions. As a result, I see perhaps two or three spam messages a day as compared to 200 messages from people and mailing lists. That's a pretty good signal-to-noise ratio -- I don't need a challenge/response system because I've taken care of my own spam problem. But if someone else has a spam problem and resorts to a challenge/response system, I'm the one who has to take the extra effort to communicate with them. That's a flawed system, in my opinion. -- To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> archives: <http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.letterrip.com/> old-archive: <http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>
