Eugen,
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 07:22:13AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > If someone emails you out of the blue, they must reply to a
> > trivial challenge to be placed in the "confirmed" list.
>
> I never answer to these on principle, and ban anyone who
> uses that spam source camouflaging as an antispam solution.
That's fair.
There is a small cost of your time to talk to me out of the blue.
If it's not worth it to you, clearly your communication to
me must not have been very important to you.
> I would also send a nuclear missile to the ip2location, if I could.
> Unfortunately, I ran out of those, and need to restock.
>
> > There's no question for them to answer, the just need to hit
> > reply to the challenge the very 1st time (they do not need to
> > resend the original message). If this is too much, you
> > can pre-clear them, or hand out a temporary address (TMDA
> > makes this easy). You can also "whitelist" certain domains.
> > Read the docs for more info.
> >
> > At first, I was put off by the idea that I would be creating
> > a small amount of extra traffic, but when you count the bytes,
>
> You're not creating extra traffic. You're sending unsolicited
> bulk email.
My on average, my confirm challenge is about 800 bytes.
Your reply will cost a few bytes too. Let's be generous,
and say the whole thing adds up to 1k bytes. Thus, I'm
generating about 300-400k bytes of traffic, total. That's
about the same amount of traffic you'd generate by looking
about about 5 extra news articles, or about 10 seconds of
a steaming video.
While there was a day when the "wasted bandwidth" argument against
challenge/response was legitimate, that day has long past. There's
plenty of bandwidth to go around.
I'd never object to someone watching an extra 10 seconds of
a news clip per day. Why would they begrudge me this?
If they did, I'd suspect our relationship has other problems. ;)
> > it's really nothing. I also worried it might be considered
> > anti-social. I've been using it since Nov 14, 2004, and so
> > far there has not been a single complaint from anybody. If you
>
> You won't receive a complaint from me either. I will just blackhole
> you for good, and that would be it.
Fair enough.
However, at that point the sender would be confirming
my suspicion they didn't really want to talk with me,
and our entire relationship (or our potential for a
relationship) was viewed as virtually worthless to
begin with! I'd be delighted to rid myself of such
would-be correspondents.
> > are sick of spam and tired of "smart" filters that never quite
> > seem to work, give TMDA a try. You can also use TMDA along
>
> To paraphrase Alan Perlis:
> When someone says "I want a spam filter in which I need only
> say what I wish done," give him a lollipop.
Do Alan Perlis pat people on the head, and give out gold stars too?
An attitude like that won't get Alan Perlis very far.
Cheers,
-Jon
