Re: opt-out registry comments

On 02 Aug 2011, at 3:05 PM, Bretton Vine wrote:

>> If you're going to make the argument that spam is cheap, you need  
>> to include
>> the full costs of spam, you can't just cherry pick one cost such as
>> "bandwidth", ignore the others and draw conclusions from that.
>
> You're misrepresenting my efforts and argument. I took the  
> information that
> was available to me and worked from there.

Then that's broken by definition. You can't just cherry pick  
information and ignore everything else because "it's not available to  
you".

> I can count on one hand the
> number of people who have looked at my calculations, or provided  
> input on
> better ways to calculate things.
>
> If you're going to dismiss my data without even looking at it,  
> there's not
> much value to me continuing to engage is there?

Your model is incomplete, any number plus a big unknown of stuff  
you've ignored equals a big unknown, regardless of your data.

You may choose to ignore the unknowns, but only after determining a  
reasonable ballpark of what they are, and that they constitute a  
negligible amount compared to the data you do know.

> Suppose no-one wants to spend time calculating the costs of spam?  
> Much more
> fulfilling to vent about it on lists, no?

Before you try and calculate the costs of spam, you first have to  
model the costs of spam, and successfully defend your model. I've  
challenged you that your model is incomplete, do you not have an  
answer to that challenge?

Regards,
Graham
--


_______________________________________________
IOZ mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.internet.org.za/mailman/listinfo/ioz