Re: Solution to "pathetic email complaints"
On Wed 21 Aug 2019 at 22:23:20 +0100, Joe wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:09:20 +0100
> Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > On Wed 21 Aug 2019 at 20:33:12 +0100, Joe wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 20:07:36 +0100
> > > Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Ease up? Perhaps.
> > > >
> > > > The "in general" is interesting and informative. Suppose the USPS,
> > > > Royal Mail or Deutsche Post etc decided the point of origin or the
> > > > destination for a mail was a criterion in their delivery policy?
> > > > What a world we would live in then! But the email world gaily
> > > > goes about deciding who sends or gets email in the name of spam
> > > > fighting.
> > > >
> > > > The epitomy of this is the discrimination against dynamic
> > > > addresses. Want to be a mail second class citizen on the Net?
> > > > Easy; don't have a static address. Want to be homeless and send
> > > > or receive a letter - Royal Mail will not stop you. Email is a
> > > > solution which has been turned into a toy communication system.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Are you saying that we all have a duty to accept spam and viruses
> > > from every bot and spammer on the planet?
> >
> > "a duty"? Don't be silly. Address the point.
> >
>
> I thought that was the point. In your opinion, are we allowed to decide
> what kinds of email we accept?
Not when you are dealing with my mail, you are not. Keep your hands
off it.
--
Brian.
Reply to: