[NCLUG] mmmmmmm...spam control

[Mike Loseke]

Thus spake Evelyn Mitchell:
> 
> * On 2002-02-19 18:46 bmc <brettcrandall at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > One tool for Linux, known as Tagged Message Delivery Agent (TMDA), takes
> > the opposite tactic and uses a "whitelist" approach. Instead of allowing
> 
> I've resisted moving to a whitelist approach because I get a lot of
> new contact emails for business. I haven't noticed any other businesses
> I contact using this approach, and I suspect that it would be offputting
> to new clients.
> 
> What do you all think? Would you consider it rude or inconvenient to
> have to reply to a whitelist message? Several major linux names use
> them now, and I don't mind if its going to a "I get way too much mail
> because I'm well known" person. 

 My main problem with this is that it says that spam is ok and that I'll
just go through the extra effort to only accept email from people I like
or know will send me email. It doesn't do anything to stop spammers from
spamming and does everything to torque off the people you forgot to add.
I haven't subscribed to the Qwest telemarketer blocking service for this
same reason (I just don't answer "out of area" calls).

 A relevant quote (gee, a quote from me?) from good ol' Ben Franklin, and
who can argue with Ben, is:

          They that can give up essential liberty to
          obtain a little temporary saftey deserve
          neither liberty not saftey.
                          -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759

-- 
   Mike Loseke    | One is never deceived, one deceives oneself.
 mike at verinet.com |     -- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, 1749-1832