From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Oct 26 04:14:19 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id EAA01676 for chat-outgoing; Sun, 26 Oct 1997 04:14:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-chat) Received: (from jmb@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id EAA01670; Sun, 26 Oct 1997 04:14:16 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jmb) From: "Jonathan M. Bresler" Message-Id: <199710261214.EAA01670@hub.freebsd.org> Subject: Re: pulling email addresses from freebsd lists To: softweyr@xmission.com (Wes Peters) Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 04:14:16 -0800 (PST) Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199710240521.XAA04620@obie.softweyr.ml.org> from "Wes Peters" at Oct 23, 97 11:21:03 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk 2 items: first, to help you deal with spam take a look at /etc/mail/README. second, with "U.S. Federal Birbrained Idiots", we would have companies selling chalk-water as milk. safety glass was not installed in cars till the government forced the issue--saftey glass was available in the '30's. be careful, what you wish for, you may get it. jmb Wes Peters wrote: > > Mike Smith writes: > > > I disagree, I believe that (mail) protocols which require authentication > > > and tracability of the sender would cut spam dramatically, > > > > This is absurdly naive. > > > > > If, when you received spam, you > > > could determine the senders email, name, and phone number the amount of > > > complaints to spammers and their ISP's would rise massively. It would > > > also provide the technological infrastructure that governments need to > > > enforce anti-spam legislation. > > > > Alright! Big Brother, here we come. > > > > You DO NOT want what you are proposing, believe me. > >