Steve Robertson wrote:
I agree with Tony here, in that there has to be a valid application for the
features of email that so many SPAMmers have exploited. However, if you
want to do away with bulk email, something's got to be done. This means
somebody, somewhere, will lose. Perhaps, if unsolicited bulk mailings were
just easier to recognize ...
I know I'm replying to the wrong message, but can't find the original.
Fix Federal law, like they did to stop bulk FAXes. Being able to
identify the spammer is indeed 90% of the battle. People tend to
be far less obnoxious when you know where they live, even if only
in cyberspace.
Impose a stiff fine, with teeth, for any spam mailer found to be using
a bogus return address, and a greatly enhanced fine for using a valid address
that is not theirs, and allow the legitimate holder of the address the right
to sue for damages if they get hate mail.
Require that a human being, not an autoresponder, be reachable at the UCE mail's
return address, and spot check to make sure they're reading and responding
periodically. Bounced messages could be forwarded directly to some department
of the FTC or Justice Department to track down the origin. It would be a huge
job,
but at least for US-based spammers, it might deter truly obnoxious behavior.
(Most ISPs would (80?)86 a client with huge mailboxes overflowing with
complaints.)
To work, I guess it would have to be a net revenue generator.
It probably wouldn't work but maybe it would silence or reform the
worst offenders.
Just some idle thoughts. I'm sure holes will be shot through starting
immediately. :-)
Since I can't keep SPAM out of my (snail) mailbox and I can't keep SPAM off
of my phone (unsolicited calls), I really don't have any expectations about
keeping it out of my email.
With the costs being so low, I'm surprised we (Internet users) don't get a
whole lot more SPAM.
SteveRob
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
http://explorer.msn.com