spam whore, norcal-systems.net
paul at vix.com
Wed Feb 3 17:18:18 UTC 1999
phil at whistler.intur.net (Phil Howard) writes:
> 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.
There's a slight definitions problem with this. The definition of "spam"
in the e-mail context is "unwanted bulk or robotic messages." It makes no
difference whether the unwanting is being done by the carrier or by the
recipient. Anything that two consenting adults do together is by definition
NOT "spam" because "spam" is "nonconsensual".
Note that there are plenty of newsgroups and mailing lists where this thread
could be relevant if expanded upon. I have therefore directed replies to
Paul Vixie <paul at vix.com>
More information about the NANOG