Re: <MISC> Spammers

[Richard Welty <rwelty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 11:29 AM 8/7/98 -0400, Anthony Dusovic wrote:
>In response to richard Welty's spam post.  I think that when a piece of spam
>makes it ti the digest, we should all reply to the return email and let them
>know how we feel.  I try to do it when I can.  Maybe the spammers will
>realize that it isn't gonna increase their business, just piss a bunch of
>people off!!

i don't think this is a good idea.

1) most from addresses in spam are forgeries

2) if they're not, then often the spammers use the replies to collect more
addresses (think about it: if the spam comes through the digest, then they
don't necessarily have  your email address, but once you send an angry
reply, they certainly will. since they sell mailing lists based on address
count, they'll cheerfully add yours.)

our concern right now is the bill that just passed out of committee to the
house floor. the single most important thing you can do right now is write
to your representative telling him that you fear that the bill will do
severe damage to the use of email on the internet, if passed in its current
form.

the url, once again, for the press release, is

/cauce.org

on another note, i've just increased the rates for spam sent to the digest
to $10 per spam per list member. when the list membership returns to its
traditional level of 3000+ after the new server transition settles down, i
expect the opportunity to try and bill someone for $30,000; it might be
enough to actually get a genuine collection effort going.

cheers,
  richard

------------------------------