nanog mailing list archives
RE: AOL scomp
From: "Drew Weaver" <drew.weaver () thenap com>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 12:57:59 -0500
The whole thing is functionally inept. Our abuse department constantly has to chase down users and half the time it turns out they were sending email to their friends and the people at AOL reported the mail as spam because half of the Internet population believes that any email that they don't find interesting is spam, and that if you aunt sends you a funny forward that isn't considered spam, and my abuse department doesn't need to track down a 75 year old woman from Zanesville, OH to tell her to knock it off. But that's just my honest opinion. -Drew -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu] On Behalf Of Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 12:40 PM To: Matt Taber Cc: nanog () merit edu Subject: Re: AOL scomp On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 12:28:58 EST, Matt Taber said:
It's too bad that about 1/3 of the reported mails are valid opt-in
lists. Proof that any network management or security or anti-spam scheme that implies end users with functional neurons is doomed from the get-go.
Current thread:
- Re: AOL scomp, (continued)
- Re: AOL scomp Edward B. Dreger (Feb 24)
- Re: AOL scomp Mark Radabaugh (Feb 24)
- Re: AOL scomp Edward B. Dreger (Feb 24)
- Re: AOL scomp Rich Kulawiec (Feb 24)
- Re: AOL scomp Matthew Crocker (Feb 24)
- Re: AOL scomp Vinny Abello (Feb 24)
- Re: AOL scomp Matthew Crocker (Feb 24)
- Re: AOL scomp Suresh Ramasubramanian (Feb 25)
- Re: AOL scomp John Osmon (Feb 24)
- Re: AOL scomp Matt Taber (Feb 24)
- Re: AOL scomp james edwards (Feb 24)
- Re: AOL scomp Joe Maimon (Feb 25)
- Re: AOL scomp Rich Kulawiec (Feb 26)