![nanog logo](/images/nanog-logo.png)
nanog mailing list archives
Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful
From: NetSurfer <netsurf () pixi com>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 15:09:57 -1000 (HST)
On Thu, 30 Oct 1997, Greg A. Woods wrote:
However if you offer cheap dial-up accounts that can be opened either immediately, perhaps with a credit card number, then you've got no real way to establish *any* level of trust with your new customers and indeed the only way you can enforce your AUP is by technical means. I.e. if
If your contract with them states that you will charge their credit card $500 for spamming and they agree to the contract, I'll bet they won't spam from the account. All of a sudden the account is not "throw away" - James D. Wilson netsurf () pixi com
Current thread:
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful, (continued)
- Message not available
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Jay R. Ashworth (Oct 29)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Greg A. Woods (Oct 29)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Peter Galbavy (Oct 30)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Greg A. Woods (Oct 29)
- Message not available
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Jay R. Ashworth (Oct 30)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Greg A. Woods (Oct 30)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful John A. Tamplin (Oct 30)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Greg A. Woods (Oct 30)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful John A. Tamplin (Oct 31)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Greg A. Woods (Oct 31)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful NetSurfer (Oct 31)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Greg A. Woods (Oct 31)
- Message not available
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Jay R. Ashworth (Oct 29)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Greg A. Woods (Oct 30)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Justin W. Newton (Oct 30)
- RE: Spam Control Considered Harmful Jon Lewis (Oct 30)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Peter Galbavy (Oct 30)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Jon Lewis (Oct 30)