|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Fwd: Re: Digital Island sponsors DoS attempt?
On Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 08:46:09AM -0500, Leo Bicknell wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 09:26:02PM -0800, John Payne wrote: > > I am trying to be good :) If you change one word in your definition... > > you cover the "small potential problem" (which has been seen already) > > without losing anything. > > > > Unsolicited Bulk E-mail. > > I'm not sure I like the use of the word bulk. The reason is that > it is not precise. Is 10 bulk? 50? Is it only bulk if I use a > "spam tool"? Bulk is more than 1 copy. How do I know if something is bulk? A simple test. Is this something that could have been sent to someone else with either no modification, or a trivial "mailmerge" operation. It then becomes up to the spammer to prove otherwise to his abuse desk, who will probably have received multiple complaints anyway. > Unsolicited, Commercial, and E-mail all have precise definitions. > particularly if we're going to get something (eventually) into a > useful law I think we need to make sure it is entirely defined of > precise terms. Sure... but focusing on commercial is dangerous. > You do cite a good example of my "small potential problem". Nothing > immediately comes to mind as a good way to catch it without causing > good things to get caught up as well. I'm going to think about it. My feelings are if its unsolicited and bulk, then it ain't good. SPAM-L is one mailbox over that way ----> -- John Payne http://sackheads.org/jpayne/ [email protected] http://sackheads.org/uce/ Fax: +44 870 0547954 To send me mail, use the address in the From: header
|