|
LMAO Dan Barker wrote: I got a postmaster message years ago I thought was quite interesting. I was sending (from a Program that built PDF's from a Domino website - Also including the plain text) of Cancer Information Documents. Some cancers affect body parts (imagine that!).The postmaster note said something to the effect of: "One of your emails contained the word vagina and may be smut. It was delivered, but you should verify one of your customers is not misusing the 'net". Very professional response, I thought. I wrote a nice reply. Bad Word, cum. As in "Summa Cum Laude". Bad Word, ...... you get the drift. Dan ps: I wonder if this will get through with vagina twice and cum three times<g>? -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bruce Barnes Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 7:29 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Lycos goes limp Since every user's definition of "spam" is different, it makes it exceedingly difficult for the ISP to do the enforcing. If there was a standard definition of what constitutes spam, it would make the proposal you have outlined much easier. If we filter all of the porn, then one user complains. If we filter all the "advertising" another user complains. If we filter word or phrase "a" then another user complains, if we filter word or phrase "b" another user complains that we are infringing on their right to receive and send e-mail based on free speech - and I agree with them. In order for ISPs to filter spam, everyone has to agree on what constitutes spam. That would be like trying to get my family to agree on which movie to go see on a saturday night or what television program to watch - impossible. Bruce Barnes -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ted Galerneau Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 19:29 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Lycos goes limp There has to be other ways to win, just a matter of finding what really works. Strong legislation against those who allow it is what I wish for. But if I wish in one hand and diddle in the other, I know which one will get full the fastest :( Seriously speaking, I wonder who we could all petition to try and force the major ISP companies to enforce monitoring for spammers and stopping those who do it. Someone stated in this thread that it will never happen, if nobody lobbies for it or tries to get the ball rolling, of course it will never happen. Any suggestions anyone? Ted -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Len Conrad Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 2:11 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] Lycos goes limp -- S.J.Stanaitis Network Administrator, Decorative Product Source http://www.dpsource.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] (877)-650-8054 x160 |
- RE: Re[2]: [IMail Forum] Lycos goes limp Len Conrad
- RE: Re[2]: [IMail Forum] Lycos goes limp Ted Galerneau
- RE: Re[2]: [IMail Forum] Lycos goes limp Jason @ AreaTech
- [IMail Forum] Joe Jabbing Beach Computers
- Re: [IMail Forum] Joe Jabbing Len Conrad
- Re: [IMail Forum] Joe Jabbing Nick Hayer
- RE: [IMail Forum] Joe Jabbing Beach Computers
- Re: [IMail Forum] Joe Jabbing Darin Cox
- RE: [IMail Forum] Joe Jabbing Beach Computers
- RE: Re[2]: [IMail Forum] Lycos goes... Ted Galerneau
- RE: [IMail Forum] Lycos goes limp S.J.Stanaitis
- RE: [IMail Forum] Lycos goes limp Ted Galerneau
- RE: [IMail Forum] Lycos goes limp Ted Galerneau
- RE: [IMail Forum] Lycos goes limp Len Conrad
- RE: [IMail Forum] Lycos goes limp Ted Galerneau
- Re[2]: [IMail Forum] Lycos goes limp Charles Frolick
- Re: Re[2]: [IMail Forum] Lycos goes limp Darin Cox
- Re[4]: [IMail Forum] Lycos goes lim... Charles Frolick
- Re: Re[4]: [IMail Forum] Lycos ... Darin Cox
- Re[6]: [IMail Forum] Lycos goes... Charles Frolick
- Re: Re[6]: [IMail Forum] Lycos ... Darin Cox
