Your argument seems to assume a T1 garage operation co-lo that is perpetually out to lunch. Provided Lycos delivers the restrictions on bandwidth they are stating, why would it exceed capacity? Come on, kids. If you can't deliver to begin with, don't sell it. I am not saying that the proposal is intrinsically right or wrong, I am saying it could have merit if just in waking up a brain-dead co-lo facility operator to deal with spamming clients. -mm -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Paul G Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 4:11 PM To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: "Make love, not spam".... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Haagsman" <erik@we-dare.net> To: "Paul G" <paul@rusko.us> Cc: <nanog@merit.edu> Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 4:30 PM Subject: Re: "Make love, not spam"....

I agree and I'm surprised you even mentioned the wordt justice...since

when is retaliating bad practices with more bad practises that are hardly likely to take out the real target considered a good idea..?

'justice' was mentioned in the message i quoted. it appears i was not remiss - i got an email from a guy running a small town isp telling me, essentially, that: 1. if i get hit with cc fraud, it is my own darn fault for not asking every single $9.99/mo customer to fax me their retina scan. 2. incurring a humongous bandwidth bill instead of being out said $9.99 is adequate punishment for my 'stupidity' 3. he likes the kind of justice where a provider gets harmed instead of the abusive customer, because Good ISPs Recognize Bad Guys On Sight. i've got news for you: ... *Abbreviated*