At 10:00 PM 2002-05-21 -0700, J C Lawrence wrote: >This problem is implicit in SPAM being defined behaviourally. People >don't have universal views on behaviour.
The views do not have to be universal. They have to be predominant enough that the blocks are painful enough that the miscreants will find no value to their behavior. If I can only get my e-mail through to 5% of the recipients, and the ISPs that provide them service find that their customers can't send e-mail either and they run, then the blocks are effective. That was the way things worked - at one point - no one would deal with spammers because the pressure was at the ISP level -- I remember blocking all of agis.net and a lot of people doing the same thing and the spammers not being able to find any other homes. I am simply not sure when things fell apart. -- War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made so by the exertions of better men than himself. -- John Stuart Mill Nick Simicich - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
