Lloyd Wood wrote:
>
> On Sun, 25 May 2003, S Woodside wrote:
>
> > Good law could work to curtail spam. Spammers do it because it's
> > profitable. Remove the profit, fine the dickens out of the worst
> > transgressors, and the cost/benefit ratio will sink. Spamming isn't
> > like hacking, there is always a way to trace back to the person who is
> > paying for the spam because they must be able to sell their product.
> > Since you can identify the individuals responsible, you can hold them
> > accountable with the right laws in place.
>
> and this has worked so well with the War on Drugs.
There is a difference here - the recipients want to see the flow stop,
so can be expected to participate in supression activities. This is not
to say this will be easy, but it's a matter of creating a suitable set
of conditions and in this case you can assign some part of the task
(e.g. reporting potential transgressions) to the recipients who want to
play...
- peterd
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Deutsch pdeutsch@gydig.com
Gydig Software
"I'm no stranger to sarcasm, Sir..."
- Red versus Blue
---------------------------------------------------------------------