Re: [anti-spam-wg] Fwd: IRT abuse-mailbox things...
-
From: Esa Laitinen <esa.laitinen@localhost
-
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 00:04:07 +0100
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 11:08:20PM +0100, Jørgen Hovland wrote:
> At the other hand, I also dislike mandatory abuse-mailbox fields as I
> disagree it should be a requirement to be reachable by email for abuse
> issues.
Do you think that there is no need to have a contact for abuse issues?
Or do you think that it doesn't need to be e-mail?
You should consider that other methods (phone, fax, snail mail) create
pretty big barriers for reporting abuse, like language (many can write
some English, but not speak), phone and fax can be pretty expensive for
some, and what use is a spam report after 7 day delivery time via snail
mail?
If you still think e-mail address is not needed for abuse issues, please
elaborate further.
--
PGP Fingerprint: 0692 1C51 A1CC 1C52 E928 9864 458C 50A9 4358 03AF
Public key at: http://iki.fi/laitinen/pubkey.html
YIM: reunaesa ICQ: 160631289 AIM: punkkinen MSN: esahi5@localhost
GoogleIM: punkki
