Re: spam return address backlash

[Roger Safian <r-safian () NORTHWESTERN EDU>]

Thanks for everyone who responded to this.

As for the topic of rejecting bounces, while I
agree the RFC was written in a kindler gentler
time, I don't think that rejecting bounces is
a good idea.

The potential confusion caused by somebody
not receiving a bounce when they make a typo
will be a serious issue, IMHO.

I've been trying to think of a popular form of
communication that does not incorporate some
sort of notice that your intended communication
did not reach it's recipient.  I can't think of
one.

Further...I hate to see the spammers win.
Perhaps rate limiting bounces might be
a useful compromise.



--
Roger A. Safian
r-safian () northwestern edu (email) public key available on many key servers.
(847) 491-4058   (voice)
(847) 467-6500   (Fax) "You're never too old to have a great childhood!"