Re: [anti-spam-wg@localhost] Contacts
- Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 16:12:04 +0700
- Priority: Normal
On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 02:40:17 -0500 (EST), der Mouse wrote:
>But it costs to be well-behaved; even if you're not a spamhaus, it
>costs time and effort to make sure your contact info is kept correct.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to clarify something!
The choice is not between "costs" and "no costs". The present
system has plenty of costs and they are borne by the victims. The
proposal places costs on the trouble-makers (spammers) and their
enablers (negligent ISPs and RIRs). This is the basic issue
of the Environmental Polluter business model. All these people
who object (or hypothetically might object) are just shifting the
costs to others. This is easily understood when it concerns
a GE plastics factory in Pittsfield Mass dumping pcbs into the
ground, and the lax supervision by the responsible supervisory
agency which let it happen. Why do such smart people (such as
the geeks and geeklets who populate this list) have such a hard
time understanding the same thing when it applies to the Internet?
How can I improve the language in my proposal so these simpleminded
objections about costs will not
be raised? Please help.
Jeffrey Race
