So, here are the choices: 1. Save thousands of people from having to deal with multiple spams per day, at the cost of presenting a minor inconvenience to a few, or 2. Require thousands of people to receive and deal with spam (or to learn all about mail filtering), in order to avoid inconveniencing a few. Easy decision to make. For every bit of whining by the usual suspects, there are thousands of folks that are very happy to have the spam kept out of their mailbox automatically. (Every mailing list manager knows that the whining by Keith and Lloyd is nothing compared to the whining by the list members as they get spammed multiple times per day.) Indeed, this is a lot like the arguments re NAT. There are the thousands of people it helps, vs. the few who are yelling that the sky will fall if it is not stamped out.
- filtering of mailing lists and NATs Keith Moore
- Re: filtering of mailing lists and NATs grenville armitage
- Re: filtering of mailing lists and NATs grenville armitage
- Re: filtering of mailing lists and NATs Keith Moore
- Re: filtering of mailing lists and NATs grenville armitage
- Re: filtering of mailing lists and NATs grenville armitage
- Re: filtering of mailing lists and NATs Eric Rosen
- Re: filtering of mailing lists and NATs Leo Vegoda
- Re: filtering of mailing lists and NATs Robert Elz
- Re: filtering of mailing lists and NATs Francis Dupont
- Re: filtering of mailing lists and NATs ned . freed
- Re: filtering of mailing lists and NATs grenville armitage
- Social solutions mean lawyers... Re: filte... grenville armitage
- Re: filtering of mailing lists and NATs Keith Moore
- Re: filtering of mailing lists and NATs Keith Moore
- Re: filtering of mailing lists and NATs Donald E. Eastlake 3rd
- Re: filtering of mailing lists and NATs Eric Rosen
