Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(December 1997)

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: An alternative to spamming?
From: "Manar Hussain" <manar @ ivision . co . uk>
Organization: Internet Vision
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 16:02:15 +0000
To: List-Managers @ GreatCircle . COM
Comments: Authenticated sender is <manarpop @ [194 . 154 . 62 . 72]>
In-reply-to: <Pine . GSO . 3 . 96 . 971212093721 . 707D-100000 @ katie . vnet . net>
References: <E0xdu5y-00057O-00 @ stingray . ivision . co . uk>

> I'm sorry.  I just don't see any grey area here.  Unsolicited
> Commercial Email (UCE) is evil, plain and simple.  There is no
> redeeming social value to UCE.  
> I suspect that most people only see this problem from the perspective of
> their personal mail box.  Deleting a couple dozen pieces of spam a day
> doesn't take but a few seconds.  Internet service providers have a
> different point of view.  Most of the spam being sent today is being
> relayed through unsuspecting Internet service providers.  The spammers
> hand off the task of delivering millions of emails to any unprotected
> mail system they can find in the net.  In many cases, the additional load
> shuts down the mail system which has been hijacked.  Legitimate mail
> services are lost until the system administrator can set up appropriate
> filters to prevent mail from being sent by his system without permission.

I very much have the ISP perspective at heart.

These are good *concerns* not good points - in fact they merely argue 
against your initial statement. People abusing mail relays is not the same 
as UCE even if they are related. If a large number of people considered it 
fun to mass mail null accounts that bounce errors into the ether we still 
ahve all the same problems but no UCE. It *is* possible to have UCE 
without any of the problems you mention.

> Spam is not a trivial problem.


> Unsolicited Commercial Email is theft of
> services.  As long as commercial spammers don't bear the true cost of
> delivering their junk mail, the problem will only get worse.

UCE is frequently delievred in this way - but here's nothing to stop UCE 
from not causing these concerns.

Jeez - I hate actually looking like I'm defending UCE as it is near 
universally conducted. Don't get me wrong - I abhore the sort of UCE that 
occurs and that you are referring to (I'd probably even go further than 
that). It's probably just that I've done too much logic/philosophy in my 
time to accept a false argument.


Internet Vision      Internet Consultancy      Tel: 0171 589 4500
60 Albert Court        & Web development       Fax: 0171 589 4522
Prince Consort Road                          vision @
 ivision .
 co .
London SW7 2BE                 

Indexed By Date Previous: Re: Clueless zubscribers?
From: Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs @ hpc . uh . edu>
Next: Re: policy issue on Bcc: of list..
From: Daniel Reed <djr @ narnia . n . ml . org>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: An alternative to spamming?
From: murr rhame <murr @ vnet . net>
Next: Re: An alternative to spamming?
From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg @ monkeys . com>

Search Internet Search