> >And I hope that the courts will finally realize that freedom of speech
> >includes the freedom not to have your communications disrupted by people
> >who want to sell you things.
>
> I dunno, Keith. What you are asking for is content control - you are saying
> that certain content shouldn't get to you. Usually, you are asking that
> content not be controlled in any way.
actually I'd settle for well-defined mandatory labelling - at the SMTP
level for big volume spammers and at the 822 level for everyone.
> But I have to say that this particular thread is fairly far afield of
> anything resembling an engineering topic. Would it be too onerous to ask
> that it be moved to a free-speech-includes-or-does-not-include-advertising
> discussion list?
the relevance to IETF is that Congress, with the encouragement of
the DMA, is pushing technically poor solutions. and IETF is the
biggest store of technical expertise in Internet mail.
whether IETF itself would want to send a message to Congress is
something I hadn't yet thought about. it might be a good idea.
but even if IETF as an organization didn't want to do this it's
certainly not unusual for IETF to act via its individual members
rather than as an organization.
Keith
