In <[email protected]>, on 09/03/2011
at 07:39 PM, Alessandro Vesely <[email protected]> said:
>I see two ways out of this. One is that recipients should first try
>to solve the issue themselves by contacting the sender directly (e.g.
>opting out),
I disagree; IMHO the recipient of spam should always report it to the
sender's provider or upstreams.
>and only resort to abuse reporting after breaking any
>relationship with the sender.
Throwing out products that you've already payed for? Not asking for
repairs when it's still under warranty? Why should the recipient be
penalized?
OTOH, you can bet your sweet bippy that they don't get any new
business from me ;-)
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2 <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
_______________________________________________
marf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
