On 01-Feb-99 Racer X wrote:
>>> No, it gives you recourse when they don't. The difference means that
>>> the service will require lots of babysitting.
>>
>>Or a deposit.
>
> Requiring a deposit would probably prevent a good bit of spam.
> Unfortunately market conditions make it impossible to do so and compete
> with other ISPs who choose not to require a deposit.
There are a growing number doing this already. Some don't and charge
a hefty "cleanup fee" to the luser's credit card (don't know the details
if anyone's tried to dispute the charge).
One day it may very well get down to Dan's idea of prepayment for mail.
I've tried something similar with telemarketers, asking them for a PO
number prior to listening to their spiel stops them in their tracks!
Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] flame-mail: /dev/null
# include <std/disclaimers.h> TEAM-OS2
Online Searchable Campground Listings http://www.camping-usa.com
"There is no outfit less entitled to lecture me about bloat
than the federal government" -- Tony Snow
==========================================================================
