My .002c worth.
Cheers
Jason
Peter Elliott wrote:
On Mon, 18 Aug 2003 15:11:30 +0000 Shane Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One simple piece of legislation would slow it down ... if you send it, you must be able to receive a reply to it. make it illeagel to forge headers and addresses. If people don't want it they send you an email opting out and if you don't listen they bounce it back at you. Image some stupid sdpammer sending 100 million or more spams and having 90% of them bounce back to his/her server. They would go out of business pretty soon.
there is little point in legislation without enforcement and none(zero, zilch, nix, nada, nought, nowt & nuttin) of the proposed solutions are attractive in the slightest *once* one begins to think of them in this way.
just try it as an exercise and you'll soon see just how appalling the consequences of these "good" intentions are - not just for the civil
libertarians among us - but for anyone using email. the costs we(the users) would have to bear are frightening.
cheers peter *not* in flame mode and *not* particularly innarested in discussing the multifarious ins+outs of any such proposed schemes.
