Re: One blacklist to rule them all, and in the darkness bind them (was Re: [spamcon-general] I have a spam-related dilemma. How shoud I deal with it?)

[David Beierl]

At 10:23 PM 10/29/2002, J.D. Falk wrote:

        There's more than two...I think you're forgetting about the ISP's
        perspective.  The vast majority of ISP's aren't spam-friendly at
        all.  It costs them real, calculable money, while to their users
        spam is just an annoyance (albeit a big one.)

There's yet another perspective, I think -- that of the customers of an ISP which uses blocking lists. Having spam rejected saves the ISP money and trouble, and likewise the customer of that ISP -- right up until said customer angers an important client by refusing their mail, or fails to gain a client because their initial query was refused, or fails to make a timely sale because their salesman is dialing in from a place that's blocked. At that point the customer may reconsider the equation.

I see that arguments that say "I can refuse anything I want, it's my network" -- and I agree with that. However if that network is providing an email service to clients, is it perhaps at least incumbent on the provider to supply the clients with a list, kept current and in as great detail as necessary to make it understandable to the client, of exactly where they can receive mail from, and where not? Otherwise how can the client make an informed decision about whether to use that supplier for his email services?

Further, in a situation where there are few choices of provider, is it not possible that some issues of monopoly or restraint of trade might enter? My personal and uninformed feeling is that the avowed practice of inconveniencing other people's customers in an attempt to force them away from their providers [in a further attempt to pressure those providers to behave in a certain way] may just possibly lead to a backlash where the spammers and the blacklisters are equally perceived as black hats, one no better than the other. The spammers appear to have captured the moral low ground, but some of the apparent bullying and end-justifies-the-means posturing by blacklisters may be eroding their heretofore exclusive claim on the territory.

Thoughts?

thanks
david beierl


--
David Beierl -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]

_______________________________________________
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]