From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Oct 21 02:07:14 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id CAA01908 for chat-outgoing; Tue, 21 Oct 1997 02:07:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-chat) Received: from word.smith.net.au (vh1.gsoft.com.au [203.38.152.122]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA01898 for ; Tue, 21 Oct 1997 02:07:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@word.smith.net.au) Received: from word.smith.net.au (localhost.gsoft.com.au [127.0.0.1]) by word.smith.net.au (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA00631; Tue, 21 Oct 1997 18:33:42 +0930 (CST) Message-Id: <199710210903.SAA00631@word.smith.net.au> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0zeta 7/24/97 To: njs3@doc.ic.ac.uk (Niall Smart) cc: "Andrew Atrens" , chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: pulling email addresses from freebsd lists In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 21 Oct 1997 08:36:27 +0100." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 18:33:42 +0930 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk (This topic is Not Appropriate for -hackers.) > 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. > If the spammers knew their identity was available, and knew they would > get caught and prosecuted, then they wouldn't do it. They would move offshore. So what? You've sacrificed your ability to participate in legitimate anonymous communications, and done nothing about the spam issue. mike