On Thu, 28 Jan 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > That's not what we are discussing. I'm not paying you to receive my mail,
> > > > your users are paying you, so that they can receive _their_ mail. Either
> > > > them come from dial-up or not.
> > >
> > > There are some services we choose to offer to our customers and there are
> > > some services that we choose not to offer to our customers. If someone wants
> > > a service we do not offer, we advise the to find someone who does.
> >
> > This is not a service that you offer, like extra POP accounts, detailed
> > accounting by the second, whatever. This is something you are _NOT_
> > providing. Or before users sign the contract, you SPECIFICALLY say, _WE DO
> > NOT_ accept mail sent directly from dial-ups?
>
> We _offer_ what we offer. We do not have to say "we do not offer ..." and
> list those things that we do not offer. We don't offer donuts and coffee
> delivery in the morning, but we don't have to put that in the contract.
Off course. But Don't u offer mail to your customers? How do u state it.
We offer you an email account where you can receive mail?
or
We offer you an email account where you can receive almost all mail sent
to you?
> > > > Obviously u never lived in a country, where monopolies are the rules, not
> > > > the exception.
> > >
> > > I never have. I'm not sure what to really tell you, other than, you seem to
> > > have a choice from among change it, leave it, or deal with it.
> >
> > Change what? :
> >
> > - the policies? I can't i'm not the government.
> > - Leave what? the country? sorry unfortunately that's not an option.
> > (unless someone, offers me a nice job, with a nice salary on a quiet and
> > peacefull place, offers directly by email please)
> > - Deal with it? That's what i have done for our entire life.
>
> Then if your government, A.K.A., your PTT, decides to change what it is they offer,
> and does so under the contractual rules they (the government) has established as
> the way things are done, then I guess you will continue to deal with it.
Yes it's called. No options.
> > AFAIK some people advocate, the acceptance of mail from dial up, and then
> > delete it. Rejection _is_ fine by me, i can take some exceptions,
> > deletions of ACK mail, is not an option.
>
> How is that not an option?
I refuse to accept that as a reasonable policy.
[forcing legitimate users to call you, cause u don't accept mail from
them]
> > Spammers simply won't give a damn, normal users do. You are not only
> > making life more difficult to people in general, you are also making it
> > more expensive.
>
> That may well be the case. But I am making it less expensive for my business,
> and hence for my customers, by choosing to _not_ have to set up the facility to
> manage the flood of incoming spam. To satisfy my customers who complain about
> spam I need to take some kind of action. There are choices to that and I have
Agreed. I just don't agree that the measuse u are advocatin is reasonable.
> to make the choice that increases the profit of my business, which is generally
> some balance between keeping/increasing the customer base (e.g. keep them happy)
> and keeping costs down (e.g. not having to buy special complex packages that
> require extra staff to maintain, or putting on extra tech support to handle the
> complaint calls, etc). If I choose to conduct my business by blocking mail
> that comes directly from a dialup port, then I have to answer to my customers
> and my P/L statement.
>
> Simply inject your e-mail into the SMTP server of your ISP if you are doing so
> from a dialup. Your ISP is offering SMTP service?
Apart from the fact that i don't use an ISP, yes he does. Only he doesn't
provide the reliability, speed (among other things) that i can provide
myself.
--
Tiago Pascoal ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) FAX : +351-1-7273394
Politicamente incorrecto, e membro (nao muito) proeminente da geracao rasca.
