[ale] OT: the Penny Black anti-spam proposal

[ChangingLINKS.com]

> Please explain to me how this works again with a mailing list.
> 
> Scenario:
1. You add foo at groups.yahoo.com to your whitelist
2. You subscribe to a mailing list "foo at groups.yahoo.com".  What happens next?
3. You get a confirmation email from foo.
4. You verify that you are adding to foo at groups

Now, you are thinking:
Well, the spammer will spider Foo, find my email address and spoof foo at .
And, that problem exists now.

However, criteria can be added to my whitelist (that technology is already 
available). For example, I can simply dump anything that does not include 
[foo] in the subject. 
Now, IF you are thinking, "well, the spammer will be examine the foo list, and 
realize that foo includes [foo] in the subject, THEN, I would say you're 
being asinine" (and there are other criteria that could be used).

Also, UNDERSTAND something clearly. 
		The goal does not HAVE to be to stop ALL spam. 
Those thinking: "What solution will stop every last piece of spam on 
the net, are the same types that go overboard and bomb abortion clinics or 
engage in other types of terrorism (note the recent war with 
somethingawful.com where the anti-spammers eventually got bombed out of 
existence :) )." I have dealt with idoits who overreact when it comes to a 
single email, and I have little tolerance for them (call it a pet peeve). 
Moreover, I wouldn't mind if those that have such a deep set hatred for spam 
were to get spammed indefinately. Anywho . . .

The point is this: There may be a chance (God forbid) that some spam gets 
through to those on mailing lists  in a worst case senerio. HOWEVER, I hope 
that you realize that if we (used the whitelist/spamarrest solution and) 
stopped spam from being effective for most of those who have a client side 
M$FT machine, and or (aol / insert other major ISPs) account then I believe we 
will effectively reduce the VOLUME and PROFIT enough that the spammers will 
"re-invent themselves" again and look for other revenue streams.

You have to understand/remember that spammers are quite flexible. 
Much, much more so than their opposition. They are changing the game as I type 
this. It would not surprise me if many of the PROFITABLE anti-spam measures 
are owned and operated by ex-spammers. 
These guys love ROI calculations more than you love Linux - the same seems to 
be true in the adult website industry. They openly share knowledge like Linux 
lovers, but rarely (if ever) get bogged down in current political events or 
long drawn out flame wars personally attacking each other. They are focused. 
They are fast. The latest evolutions are simply amazing (at least to someone 
like me - who appreciates the art of hard core guerilla marketing on a 
shoe-string budget). Honestly, I think many spammers would "make it" with 
a .com or any other media you move them to.

Anyway, forget all of that and let me help them out a little:
                                        Ignore Bob's ideas. 
Support charging *ourselves* to send email.
Support legislation to end spam regardless of it's weaknesses.
While you're at it support the Patriot Act, I'm feeling a little private.
                                Long live the spammers!
-- 
Wishing you Happiness, Joy and Laughter,
Drew Brown
http://www.ChangingLINKS.com

> -- 
> David Corbin <dcorbin at users.sourceforge.net>