Re: Principles of Spam-abatement

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Dr. Jeffrey Race <jrace@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> John, your summary distils a lot of hard work but is deeply troubling,
> because it is constructed entirely on a "make the victims pay"
> foundation. 

   Frankly I don't see "make the victims pay" in any of the principles.

> As long as that is your stance, then sure it is so that "Spam . . .
> will remain a long-term battleground".  

   It does, alas, remain the stance of enough people that I fear spam
_will_ remain a long-term battleground. (Do enough others disagree?
Should I remove that principle?)

> A number of us have given this a lot of thought to come up with a
> practical solution which requires no new technology and no new
> legislation. It has been proven to work within hours.   
> 
> Those interested may view an interim document (comments welcome) at
> 
>  <http://www.camblab.com/misc/univ_std.txt>

   That is an implementation plan. I've refused to put implementation
plans into the statement of principles; and I stick by that.

   (When we find the appropriate forum, I'll be happy to comment on
your "interim document".)

====
   Alas: I look at the clock, and consider the delay of distribution
to this list -- I really doubt enough time remains to discuss any
more changes.

   Thus, though I'd really like to add Dave Crocker's principle, and
I'm perfectly willing to remove the "long-term battleground" one, I
expect to be posting the same document that I posted here at 19:32 EST
to the MARID-planning list in twenty minutes or less.

   Thanks to everyone for a well-informed discussion.

--
John Leslie <john@xxxxxxx>


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]