Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 17:26:17 -0500 (EST) From: Chuck Robey <chuckr@mat.net> To: Jim Bryant <jbryant@unix.tfs.net> Cc: Alfred Perlstein <bright@hotjobs.com>, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Forward all spam to UCE@FTC.GOV Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9901141714220.317-100000@picnic.mat.net> In-Reply-To: <199901142056.OAA66441@unix.tfs.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 14 Jan 1999, Jim Bryant wrote: > > Since spam is mass mailing automating replies will swamp the poor folks at > > FTC. > > > > If anything, a spam condensing local server for a region that co-odinated > > with a centralized server to reduce dup'ing spam complaints (and perhaps > > keep a count would be a good thing) > > you mean reduce the number of submissions to give a false impression > that the problem isn't as bad as it really is. stop defending > spammers. He didn't come close to doing that. > the more submissions, the faster something gets done. anything else > would give a false impression that the problem is smaller than it > really is, and thus more of the same ineffective regulation that we > already have. "the more submissions, the faster something gets done". That's pretty obviously wrong. The FTC isn't god, and will only work on a limited number of things at a time. They have a budget, you know, and they can't just whistle up more money. If you turn their mailbox into a trashbox, they'll stop reading it. You do realize they have humans working there, right? > let the reduction and counting be done by the FTC Why? If you're angry at the FTC not being more active (which I would certainly support) then yell at the Republican party, which would like to see it totally removed. The FTC is trying to do what they can, and they don't need folks making a hard job impossible. which more than > probably already has such measures in place locally. let them > standardize what they do with it, anything else is obstruction of > justice. > > i'm sorry if i'm reading you wrong, but i understand how the > government operates. also, anyone who doesn't take a hard-line stand > on this topic can't be trusted, and is part of the problem. to not > deal with spammers ruthlessly is to pander to spammers. The FTC hasn't got the resources to go after every spammer. Again, if you want that changed, go after the folks that write their budget. Write your congressman, he's the problem. > if a million people forward a million copies of the exact same spam, > but addressed to each individual that forwards it will get something > done. Why? If I worked for the FTC, and I saw a million mail messages (and I was a manager with a *real* budget) I would simply tell my administrator to put all mail to that address in the circular file. That's what you would do (prove me wrong here, tell me what you would do. Remember I said a manager with a *real* budget). They haven't the people or the budget to do what you want, and it's a whole lot better to have *some* fixes than just to yell louder, and drown out any real possibility of help. ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chuckr@glue.umd.edu | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 213 Lakeside Drive Apt T-1 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run Journey2 and picnic (FreeBSD-current) (301) 220-2114 | and jaunt (NetBSD). ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9901141714220.317-100000>