internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
List archive
- From: "Michael Thomas" <mdthomas AT mindspring.com>
- To: internetworkers AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
- Subject: Re: fighting spam
- Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 15:45:15 -0400
>
> I know that its been effective against our company in terms of getting the
> attention of RoadRunner. Every time we send email to our mailing list
> someone
> forgets they subscribed and uses SpamCop or a similar service to complain.
> The end result is RoadRunner (our corporate ISP) sends me a registered
> letter
> to start the whole process over again. ("No, it wasn't spam, etc.")
'Tis the problem. Complaints about legitimate mass email ties
up bandwidth and causes other unintended consequences, while
the BadSpammers (those out of compliance with H.R. 95, which
requires an opt-out and prohibits faked headers) are unaffected.
Still, even BadSpammers aren't *just* trying to annoy us (usually):
There is some window open through which their potential 'customers'
are supposed to reach them. Spam is lead generation, while their
chief business problem is the filtering of leads.
Thus, the terrain does have symmetry.
-
fighting spam,
Bill Geschwind, 05/09/2002
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: fighting spam, Josep L. Guallar-Esteve, 05/09/2002
- Re: fighting spam, Bill Geschwind, 05/09/2002
- Re: fighting spam, Kate Johnson, 05/09/2002
- Re: fighting spam, Josep L. Guallar-Esteve, 05/09/2002
- Re: fighting spam, Michael S Czeiszperger, 05/09/2002
- Re: fighting spam, Michael Thomas, 05/09/2002
- Re: fighting spam, Lisa C. Boyd, 05/09/2002
- Re: fighting spam, Steven Champeon, 05/09/2002
- Re: fighting spam, Michael Czeiszperger, 05/09/2002
- Re: fighting spam, Michael D. Thomas, 05/09/2002
- Re: fighting spam, Steven Champeon, 05/10/2002
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.