nanog mailing list archives

Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful


From: Rik Schneider <rik () master netasset com>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 13:43:54 -0800 (PST)

I agree. My point was that not informing ones customers about said filters
is effectively lying.

Rik Schneider
Unix Systems Administrator
Net Asset LLC
1315 Van Ness Ave
Suite 103
Fresno CA 93721

On Tue, 28 Oct 1997, Martin Cox wrote:

As a customer with separate ISP connections for business and personal use, I would
pay, as a feature, for SPAM blocking that was managed by my ISP. I believe ALL your
major business customers would pay to have SPAM blocked from delivery to their
employees.

Being upfront with your customers will most likely be very beneficial, as well as
mildly profitable.

Cheers,

Marty

Rik Schneider wrote:

Jay,

I am a little confused here.  First you state that I am wrong for stating
that IAP's informing users of any blocking is an ethical issue.

Then you state that lying about any blocking is an ethics issue.

IMHO not informing customers (paying or otherwise) of these blocks is as
bad as lying about them.

Rik Schneider
Unix Systems Administrator
Net Asset LLC
1315 Van Ness Ave
Suite 103
Fresno CA 93721

On Tue, 28 Oct 1997, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:

On Tue, Oct 28, 1997 at 11:38:15AM -0800, Rik Schneider wrote:
On Tue, 28 Oct 1997, J.D. Falk wrote:
On Oct 28, Daniel Karrenberg <Daniel.Karrenberg () ripe net> wrote:
Some of them are esentially centralsied methods of controlling Internet
content.  Paul's anti-spam feed for instance prevents users of some
providers from seeing spam.  The user has no choice; they cannot opt to
receive spam other than by switching to another provider.  Even worse:
they may not even be aware that they are "missing" some content.

  Users should be aware if their ISP is blocking something,
  no matter what it is.  However, that's not a technical or
  operational issue...I'm not sure what category it is.

How about "ethical issue"

Not at all, Rik.  The only time it becomes an ethical issue is if you
_lie_ to your paying customers about what you are doing.  As long as
you tell the customers what you're doing, then they have the option to
vote with their wallets.  There are better than 4000 IAPs in this
country; no one has any excuse for limiting how those people can
operate their business on this particular point on the grounds of 'free
speech'.

The first amendment only limits the _government_, anyway; this has been
the topic of much case law.

Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth                                                jra () baylink com
Member of the Technical Staff             Unsolicited Commercial Emailers Sued
The Suncoast Freenet      "Pedantry.  It's not just a job, it's an
Tampa Bay, Florida          adventure."  -- someone on AFU      +1 813 790 7592




--
*****************************************************
YAGO Systems, Inc.           http://www.yagosys.com
Martin Cox                   mailto:mcox () yagosys com
Director, Product Management
795 Vaqueros Ave.            Phone: 408-774-2900 x244
Sunnyvale, CA 94086          Fax:   408-774-2908
*****************************************************





Current thread: