On Tue, 2 Dec 1997, Vadim Antonov wrote:

Adrian Chadd <adrian@ourworld.net> wrote:

...

Erm, say you put your address on a webpage.

Or post it to USENET. Better yet, write your home telephone, address and social security number so every bozo can visit you or steal your credit.

[snip] I hope you realise I meant email address here. :-) This isn't relevant to NANOG I agree, so I'll be brief. Then I'll shut up :) Why should I waste my time having to implement anti-spam measures when it isn't fully effective anyway? Not everyone does it, so its not completely worth it. People have a habit of finding holes and back doors in protocols, programs, and I'm pretty sure any system brought in to effectively kill spam would either be so restrictive it becomes a pain in the butt to use, or its just 'broken' and people find a way to spam through it. Makes it all worthless. Although there ARE loophools in legalese, these are generally harder to find, and the penalties involved would deter most people from spamming. So IMHO, its really a question of which one BEST solves the problem QUICKEST. if you can get everyone to fix their mailer agents to do the anti-spam thing, or rush in a new mail protocol, hell.. feel free. I certainly don't have the time on my hands to keep rooting around upgrading mail agents to support new protocols, or anti spam stuff, etc, etc... Adrian (who really shouldn't be posting to email lists as much as he has been lately.. :-)