OT: question re. the Volume of unwanted email (fwd)
Jack Bates
jbates at brightok.net
Wed Jun 18 16:58:01 UTC 2003
Miles Fidelman wrote:
>
> Since a lot of the arguments about spam hinge on the various costs it
> imposes on ISPs, it seems like it would be a good thing to get a handle on
> quantitative data.
>
While there is a cost to ISPs reguarding spam, the highest cost is still
on the recipient. End User's who are outraged by their children getting
pornography in email, or having trouble finding their legitimate emails
due to the sheer volume of spam that fills their inbox. There are cases
where emails are so far out of 822 compliance that the mail clients lock
up or crash when attempting to read the message. Time is expended across
the board in handling, blocking, verifying, or deleting spam. In this
day and age, time is often more valuable than money and the assigned
value is dependant on the individual. Unfortunately, end user's cannot
just highlight and hit delete on spam. They must look at almost every
email to verify that it is spam and not a business or personal email.
The misleading subject lines and forgeries are making this even more
necessary.
-Jack
More information about the NANOG
mailing list