nanog mailing list archives
Re: Broken domain statistics...
From: Jerry Eyers <jeyers () ialn com>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 18:08:06 -0500
P.S. Just in case people have forgotten: I want to change the postal laws to apply to electronic communication. This doesn't completely ban spam, but bans a number of pernicious activities which technically aren't illegal if a postal address isn't involved, requires that spamers not send email to people who don't want it, and bans sexual solictations to addresses that don't want it, have children, etc. It has the advantage of being a) reasonable b) guaranteed constitional c) inexpensive to implement. These other "solutions" are just poorly thoughtout lunacy, which will have side effects that are worse than the original problem.
Keep in mind what other "benefits" that brings to the table, like issues related to network monitoring. Suddenly you can no longer legaly plug a sniffer into your network to fix a problem because you could be carrying someone's email over the wire. It would be better than what is going on now, but I am not sure it would be the best solution. Jerry
Current thread:
- Re: Broken domain statistics..., (continued)
- Re: Broken domain statistics... J.D. Falk (Feb 12)
- Re: Broken domain statistics... John-David Childs (Feb 12)
- Re: Broken domain statistics... Damien O'Rourke (Feb 12)
- Re: Broken domain statistics... NetSurfer (Feb 12)
- Re: Broken domain statistics... Jon Lewis (Feb 12)
- Re: Broken domain statistics... Peter Galbavy (Feb 13)
- Re: Broken domain statistics... Michael Handler (Feb 12)
- Re: Broken domain statistics... Dean Anderson (Feb 16)
- Re: Broken domain statistics... Jerry Eyers (Feb 16)
- Re: Broken domain statistics... Scott Weeks (Feb 17)
- Re: Broken domain statistics... Scott Weeks (Feb 17)