At 08:55 PM 3/21/2002 -0500, FoxC1 wrote:

>I understand an ISP would not want to be a 'gatekeeper', at this point in
>time.

Well, that's doubtlessly true, but that is not the point I was attempting 
to make.

>  When better software for shutting out spam is created, it will be less
>lucrative for the spammers to keep trying, and 'better software' should - as
>one of it's goals, lower the cost of DEALING with spam, and when well
>deployed, EVENTUALLY make it less lucrative to try to spam, thus lowering
>the bandwidth requirements an ISP is forced to deal with.

Yes. But ISPs should not have to spend the money to develop that software, 
or purchase the software from a third party, in order to accommodate 
spammers. Those cost will get passed on to subscribers, too.

Better still if the spammers just don't spam. Then the ISPs don't have to 
spend money on anything in order to deal with it - not on software, not on 
bandwidth, not on anything. The market may not be perfectly efficient, but 
it's efficient enough. If the ISPs' costs go down, so do ours.

_______________________________________________
spamcon-general mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.spamcon.org/mailman/listinfo/spamcon-general#subscribers
Subscribe, unsubscribe, etc: Use the URL above or send "help" in body
    of message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Contact administrator: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to