Re: spam whore, norcal-systems.net
At 03:38 PM 2/1/1999 -0800, I Am Not An Isp wrote:
At 03:35 PM 2/1/99 -0800, Dan Hollis wrote:
On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, I Am Not An Isp wrote:
What type of monitoring are you talking about? Or are you saying I cannot filter packets through my network as I please?
You havent been on nanog for very long, otherwise youd know that all your networks and all your packets belong to Dean, our resident pro-spam nut.
I take issue with being called pro-spam. It's kind of like calling anyone who thinks Clinton should be impeached anti-democrat, or perhaps pro-republican. I am pro-law. If you want to ban spam, there is a way to do that: People banned junk faxes, and banned telemarketers from calling your cell phone. However, they did that by passing laws. Not by taking the law into their own hands. Secondly, the internet isn't a lawless place. There are already laws which control how you must behave. Especially if you might have access to other peoples private electronic communications. We don't need more privacy laws. We just need to enforce those we have. Unfortunately, many people think they can do whatever they please. I suppose if the laws aren't enforced, then they are right. --Dean [note that I don't take issue with being called a nut ;-) I think Clinton should be impeached, too.] ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Plain Aviation, Inc dean@av8.com LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP http://www.av8.com ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I personally think you are pro-zac... On Tue, 2 Feb 1999, Dean Anderson wrote:
I take issue with being called pro-spam. It's kind of like calling anyone who thinks Clinton should be impeached anti-democrat, or perhaps pro-republican.
I am pro-law. If you want to ban spam, there is a way to do that: People banned junk faxes, and banned telemarketers from calling your cell phone. However, they did that by passing laws. Not by taking the law into their own hands.
Secondly, the internet isn't a lawless place. There are already laws which control how you must behave. Especially if you might have access to other peoples private electronic communications. We don't need more privacy laws. We just need to enforce those we have. Unfortunately, many people think they can do whatever they please. I suppose if the laws aren't enforced, then they are right.
--Dean
[note that I don't take issue with being called a nut ;-) I think Clinton should be impeached, too.]
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Plain Aviation, Inc dean@av8.com LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP http://www.av8.com ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
-- I am nothing if not net-Q! - ras@poppa.thick.net
Dean Anderson wrote:
I am pro-law. If you want to ban spam, there is a way to do that: People banned junk faxes, and banned telemarketers from calling your cell phone. However, they did that by passing laws. Not by taking the law into their own hands.
I don't want to ban spam. I think if two consenting adults wish to carry on a spamming relationship, that should be their choice, not mine nor the government's. What I do want to do is NOT SERVICE spam. I elect to offer a service to deliver NON-SPAM mail, because I believe there is more of a market in NON-SPAM mail than there is in either SPAM mail or a mix. -- -- *-----------------------------* Phil Howard KA9WGN * -- -- | Inturnet, Inc. | Director of Internet Services | -- -- | Business Internet Solutions | eng at intur.net | -- -- *-----------------------------* phil at intur.net * --
participants (3)
-
Dean Anderson -
Phil Howard -
Rich Sena