From: attila@primenet.com
To: cypherpunks <cypherpunks@toad.com>
Message Hash: 337cf34cc47b26cf30cc44f6f430ce5b84b41a5caa286b3fc30e1f57d1108eaa
Message ID: <199611270417.VAA15665@infowest.com>
Reply To: <199611270037.SAA11474@algebra>
UTC Datetime: 1996-11-27 04:17:19 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 20:17:19 -0800 (PST)
From: attila@primenet.com
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 20:17:19 -0800 (PST)
To: cypherpunks <cypherpunks@toad.com>
Subject: Re: Another Nutty Idea about SPAM
In-Reply-To: <199611270037.SAA11474@algebra>
Message-ID: <199611270417.VAA15665@infowest.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
In <199611270037.SAA11474@algebra>, on 11/26/96
at 06:37 PM, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) said:
::Omegaman wrote:
::> Igor Chudov wrote:
::>
::> Okay fine. The spammer is "advised" but if he is unscrupulous in the
::> first place, he'll simply ignore the advice and continue bulk-mailing
::> to every address he can grab.
::In which case the spam-fighting mob will harass him.
^^^^^^^^
strange choice of words, when I first read it,
my mind read _harvest_.
::> > Database maintainers could even provide a email filter-bot that would
::> > accept recipient lists by email and send back the same lists, but
::> > WITHOUT addresses that wish not to receive spam. This way stupid
::> > low-tech spammers (who make up the majority) will be able to process
::> > their email lists quickly and easily.
::>
::> Indeed, stupid low-tech spammers would benefit from such a service if
::> they wish to honor "do not send" requests.
::>
well, I've always figured that people are basically OK
until proven otherwise --or their is money involved.
then there are lawyers....
--
maybe there is an analogy:
militias: "the only way they'll take my weapon
is from my cooling, smoking hand...."
bubba: "the only way they'll take my executive privileges
is to impeach me --IF I consent to leave."
<attila>
Return to November 1996
Return to “Omegaman <omega@bigeasy.com>”