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