Re: Goal: easier cpu parsable opt out tags

BW> Even better, IMO, would be the following.
BW> 
BW> * Users do not want to "un-subscribe" from something that they
BW> never subscribed to in the first place. The default policy 
BW> should be for subscription and un-subscription to be entirely
BW> under the control of the recipient, such that no third party 
BW> can "subscribe" or "un-subscribe" them to anything.

Trying to subtly bring them around to IM2000, are you ?  (-:

<URL:http://homepages.tesco.net./~J.deBoynePollard/Proposals/IM2000/CaseStudies/public-mailing-list.html>

BW> * Users want to be able to trivially blacklist any given sender.

Blacklisting senders is of course a major weapon in IM2000.

BW> It's still not entirely effective, though, because any given
BW> person can create an unlimited number of sender identities 
BW> from which to spam. 

... which implies a degree of complicity on the part of the message
store and, of course, simply causes the recipient to escalate to 
the next step in the IM2000 ostracism process - the one that gives
message store owners reason to exercise a degree of control over
senders.

<URL:http://homepages.tesco.net./~J.deBoynePollard/Proposals/IM2000/CaseStudies/lucy-reading.html>