Re: Water tight opt-in (yet another FUSSP)

On January 13, 2014 at 21:37 [email protected] (Martijn Grooten) wrote:
 > On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 01:56:55PM -0500, Barry Shein wrote:
 > > So forgive me if I get a bit skeptical when someone tells me how big
 > > email marketers et al will be careful to not actually ANNOY people and
 > > that's only the purview of criminal or near-criminal types.
 > > 
 > > It's wishful thinking IMHO.
 > > 
 > > And if we wait for it to be measurable it'll be too late.
 > 
 > What if we build a system that makes sure annoying people doesn't
 > scale? So that if you annoy a lot of people, or are otherwise sloppy
 > in your sending practises, your email will be blocked.
 > 
 > What if we have already built such a system?

Blocked at what level? The mailbox? Many, myself included, don't
consider that a sufficient solution.

But it is true that the stock-in-trade of the most annoying bulk
spammers is address mobility.

But blocking the address mobile is easier said than done which of
course is why they rely on it as a technique.

-- 
        -Barry Shein

The World              | [email protected]           | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*
-
This is the asrg mailing list.  To change your subscription settings, see
http://lists.services.net/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr/domain=lists.gurus.org