on Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 08:14:43AM -0500, Kirk Strauser (kirk@strauser.com) wrote:
> At 2003-08-03T04:13:26Z, "Karsten M. Self" <kmself@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>
> <proofread>
>
> > Effective spam management tools should place the burden either
> > on the spammer, or at the very least, on the person receiving
> > the benefits of the filtering (the mail recipient). Instead,
> > challenge-response puts the burden on, at best, a person not
> > directly benefitting, and quite likely (read on).
>
> ...and quite likely what? Purple? Annoyed? Tall?
Yeah, yeah.
That's been updated to "...quite likely (read on) a completely innocent
party". Which still isn't quite the correct connotation. I'm looking
at the case of mailing list-triggered C-R.
> > The mechanics of C-R systems lead to a fairly high probability
> > that users of such
>
> ...systems disappear without a trace?
Thanks. "...users of such systems will fail to receive non-spam
messages, of potentially very high significance".
Appreciated, Kirk.
Peace.
--
Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
Backgrounder on the Caldera/SCO vs. IBM and Linux dispute.
http://sco.iwethey.org/
Attachment:
pgpwo_dIw9ZbM.pgp
Description: PGP signature