On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 07:24:21PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
} Paul Schinder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
}
} > It may come to that. If DSL IP banks become a significant, easily
} > blockable source of mostly spam, then of course they will be blocked.
} > So? Why is this supposed to be a problem for me if I block them?
}
} Because it's possible there will reach a point where the number of hoops
} the person using DSL would have to jump through to successfully get mail
} to you will exceed their patience, at which point they'll just say "screw
} it" and stop communicating with you.
Yes, Russ, but if I care, then I'll arrange things so that they can
send mail. If I don't care, then it doesn't matter. One less thing
in my mailboxes.
}
} I'll point out that this mailing list is being run off what is arguably an
} IP address provided to an end-user by an ISP. (At least possibly; I'm not
} aware of whatever arrangements Dan has with his university. But here at
} Stanford, I'd put faculty machines into that category.)
Clearly different. Dial-up's are usually too much trouble for an ISP
track who was using what when. You know who's responsible for a
university faculty machine. (I'm aware of the student problem; my
wife is a university faculty member.) The number of spams I get that
I can identify as from university faculty machines is zero. I get
them on occasion from open University relays that are identifiable as
mail relay machines. If DSL lines are accountable, then they won't
be major sources of spam unless the ISP that controls them
deliberately allows spam.
The whole point of people on the other side of this is that I should
make decisions on my end based on their desires. That's not the way
the game works.
}
} --
} Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
(About to send this from a machine using qmail on a dialup.. with a
fixed IP.)
--
Paul Schinder
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
