Some good mind stretching points here.  Glad I joined this group.

> Unless you're going to make them mandatory,
>some (many) people won't have white lists. 

Agreed.  And I'm certainly not in favor of making white lists mandatory.
  The whole point is to give users, not _anybody_ else, control over
their mailbox.   

I take your point that many people won't have white lists.   I have to
agree with that.   One of the reasons (but not the only) many people
won't make the change is because there is very little leadership
available to show them this path.    If we applied the same passion and
smarts we now apply to blacklisting, to white listing, we could overcome
many of the obstacles involved.

I'm not wedded to white lists.   My only interest in them is that I don't
see any other strategy for victory that keeps the power (and
responsibility) with the end user, where it belongs imho.    We've had
more than 10 years of the current regime, and it seems to be leading
nowhere....

>Almost none of the burden falls on spammers.

Personally, my passion is more to make them irrelevant than it is to
punish them.   I think I represent a majority of email users in saying I
want out of "the struggle" not more in to it.  

My worry is that the typical email user is simply getting sick of the
whole discussion.   They won't join either camp, they'll just bail out of
email (bulk email particularly) and take their energy somewhere else.   I
can see this happening to me personally, and bulk email has had a
dramatic positive impact on my life.

We don't have forever to make a difference that people can easily notice.  

>As I've demonstrated before, the end result is that you make life
>more difficult for the good guys, and - at best - leave the status quo for
>the bad guys. 

If leaders on this subject, like those found here, promote white listing
as we are doing here, then I agree with you again.   Really, I'm not
being sarcastic.   It's clear to me that 1) white listing would work and
2) few people are interested in this solution.   That's a reality I can
accept.    I don't see another strategy for victory anywhere, but that's life.

> But much of that mail is still sent by
>individuals in the United States, promoting goods and services (using the
>terms loosely...) that are sold in the United States. 

Good point.   Laws do have a chance of being effective against this
percent of spam traffic.  

>Second, I'm not talking about giving government more control over my life -
>indeed, my fear is that by failing to act and debating idealistic fantasies
>we will end up with laws that _do_ give the government control over my
>mailbox. I'm pretty sure nobody on the list thinks that's a good idea.
>However, I would like to use some of the government's power to assert
>control over my mailbox.

Point taken.   And this is a thread for another group.   Just had to
comment that there is some element of fantasy in thinking you can give
new power to the government and that power will always be used in the way
you personally think it should be, against those you personally feel are
the problem.    Example, look at the power exercised by ORBS and MAPS and
other well intended blacklisting agencies.   Good goals, heroic efforts,
but lot's of innocent people get hurt in the process.....    

A solution that is end user based does not have these dangers.

>Finally, a more philosophical point, laws would actually establish the
>position that what spammers are doing is wrong and has a cost to all of us.
>The problem with your door lock analogy, outlined in some earlier notes, is
>that if somebody does break into my home - lock or no lock - I can actually
>call the police and expect them to do something. If somebody breaks into my
>email box, as it now stands there is no crime.

Another good point.   With you here.   I'd support laws against spamming
(well not any law) in general for the philosophical reason you refer to.
  As we've said, the global nature of the Net, and my experience with
telemarketing, does not give me hope that this is "the" solution.   But
every bit helps, sure.

Excellent post, thanks for the time you put in to it.

Phil


_______________________________________________
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