[geeks] Idea for law that forces unsolicited mail to have a special header tag

[Geek]

What if it made an imposed fine of large money or made it possible to sue
any spammer who did not do this? What is the likelihood then? I think a
$100,000 suit settlement or $50,000 fine(applicable to the infrastructure of
the net) would be worse then a few in the know filtering out the Spam. I am
thinking this may work to either bankrupt the spammer's or make them useless
in other way. I don't get nearly a many as most I know, but it is still the
most annoying thing about being online.

> How dare you step away from your keyboard for more than 5 minutes.  I'm
> taking away your geek badge!

But.. but.... It was my nephew's last tournament and I wanted to see him
play hockey! Is that such a crime??? To have a family and want to see them?



Dwight Wallbridge,
Webmaster, Geek, Blogger.

Geek's World http://www.geeksworld.net
Geek Blog http://www.geekblog.net/

----- Original Message -----
From: "James Sharp" <jsharp at psychoses.org>
To: "Geeks" <geeks at sunhelp.org>
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 5:37 PM
Subject: Re: [geeks] Idea for law that forces unsolicited mail to have a
special header tag


> > Is it not reasonable to suggest that the US and other nations enact laws
> > that state all unsolicited/mass emails must have a special header that
can
> > be filtered if the person does not want it? I mean the spammer's
> > associations are whining and complaining that they are being vilified as
> > spammer's when they are only trying to run legitimate businesses, so in
that
> > case they should have no problem with providing the recipients a way to
> > easily get out of all such emails. I mean it makes logical sense to me,
so
> > it would work, right?
>
> I can count on one hand the number of spammers who would actually a) Go
> for this idea or b) Do it if it were passed.  (I'd probably have 4 or 5
> fingers left over).
>
> Would spam marketers (both legitimate and swindlers) want to tag their
> mail with something that would make it easy for people do delete and
> ignore without even so much as looking at it?
>
> I get maybe 3 or 4 pieces of what I consider "legitimate" spam a month
> ("legitimate" is what I consider things from amazon.com or
> orbitz.com...things I'd sort of be interested in, even though I've tried
> to opt-out of their lists).  The rest of it is "INCREASE THE SIZE OF YOUR
> PENIS BY 13.9 FEET" or "GET A MORTGAGE FOR 2.3%" or "GET A LIFETIME SUPPLY
> OF VIAGRA WITHOUT A PRESCRIPTION".  Most of those people have gone through
> quite a bit of trouble to try to mask the fact that they're sending you
> spam.  I doubt passing some law that they'll all ignore is going to put a
> dent in the amount of spam.
>
> >
> > I am not foolish enough to sit here and say it would be acceptable, as
the
> > spammer's would find some way to argue against it or work around it, but
it
> > *does* make sense to me! Anyone else agree? Disagree?
>
> Makes sense?  yes.  Practical?  Not in the least.
>
> >
> > I may not get to your replies for a couple of days as this list had more
> > then 300 posts while I was out of town from Friday around 2 to last
night
> > around 9 CST. I do so hate to not read posts because I use this list
more to
> > learn then to laugh, though there are large quantities of both.
>
> How dare you step away from your keyboard for more than 5 minutes.  I'm
> taking away your geek badge!
> _______________________________________________
> GEEKS:  http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/geeks