Spam = Jail Time! - dslreports.com

Forums » FTC Swings their new Anti-Spam Bat » Spam = Jail Time!


Uniqs: 24	Share Topic:	RSS topic:	toggle: flat / full normal / watch	Post a:	Post a:

I've been saying it for years »
« There's a dark side

MrTangent join:2001-12-28 Earth	Spam = Jail Time! Woah. "Arrests" 'Tis not a good day to be a spammer. I have a feeling Kilingspam is going to be elated at this news.
	permalink · 2002-02-12 11:35:38 ·

WildGod God Is Dead Premium join:2002-01-30 NYC	Re: Spam = Jail Time! Ahhhhh we meet again M. Tangent. Im very happy after reading this article. These ppl were not arrested simply for sending spam. They were involved in scamming people out of money and they deserve everything they get. -- AOL DSL SUCKS
	permalink · 2002-02-13 10:49:07 ·

MrTangent join:2001-12-28 Earth	Re: Spam = Jail Time! Wildxgod, I'm tending to side with your view (and hello again). I think the part that we differed on before was our definition of spam (that is to say I think we were confused on each other's definition). I agree that deceptive spam where the spammer hides their true identity and offers no valid product should be eliminated.
	permalink · 2002-02-13 14:11:12 ·

WildGod God Is Dead Premium join:2002-01-30 NYC	Re: Spam = Jail Time! then we finally agree. but even with legal commercial email i feel there should be a way to opt out. hey some ppl dont mind advertisment in their emails but some of us do so i at least want that option. -- AOL DSL SUCKS
	permalink · 2002-02-13 15:20:15 ·

ballszzee join:2001-07-26 Las Vegas, NV	I dislike spam advertizing as much as anyone. Yet, any good free email client/program is easily configurable to stop 99% of spam (eg. incredimail.com and some isps). When is the FTC to concentrate on "deceptive telco practices" (called "slamming" at FTC.gov)? (that defraud Americans out of millions more than email advertizers!) [text was edited by author 2002-02-15 06:07:24]
	permalink · 2002-02-15 06:02:48 ·

latenite6

join:2002-01-30
New Cumberland, PA

Re: Spam = Jail Time!

Filtering 99% of Spam, no. Filtering (and blocking) 99% of stopping your mail, that is more realistic. I will agree that filtering your mail is something that everyone should learn and take advantage of. However, there are those out there that just can't grasp the concept of setting up a filter to block one message with out it affecting another. The more filters you have in place, the more complex the filtering scheme becomes.

I personally will always use filters. ISPs, the government, and filtering services (Brightmail and other) can't stop it all. However, (as much as I hate to admit it) right now this looks like a positive step.

Latenite

said by ballszzee:
I dislike spam advertizing as much as anyone. Yet, any good free email client/program is easily configurable to stop 99% of spam (eg. incredimail.com and some isps). [text was edited by author 2002-02-15 06:07:24]

permalink · 2002-03-12 15:54:04 · Print ·

PTS Premium join:2001-12-13 Charlotte, NC clubs:	I say: 1. Great! 2. Screw opt-out; make the lusers use opt-IN! 3. Hope the rest of the lusers are reading... -- The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote.
	permalink · 2002-03-12 11:14:05 ·

your comment..

Forums » FTC Swings their new Anti-Spam Bat

I've been saying it for years »
« There's a dark side


Wednesday, 09-Dec 07:32:55	Terms of Use \| Privacy Policy \| Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo \| feedback \| contact over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com. page compression OFF