Re: [Asrg] Adding a spam button to MUAs

Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com> Thu, 04 February 2010 18:08 UTC

Return-Path: <mike@mtcc.com>
X-Original-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CEC13A6D5B for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 10:08:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.443
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.443 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, SUBJECT_FUZZY_TION=0.156]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Q8HxMVIITDn8 for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 10:08:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mtcc.com (mtcc.com [64.142.29.208]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56B303A6C8C for <asrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 10:08:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from takifugu.mtcc.com (fugu.mtcc.com [64.142.29.208]) (authenticated bits=0) by mtcc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o14I9Tcj012826 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <asrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 10:09:30 -0800
Message-ID: <4B6B0D59.5000909@mtcc.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 10:09:29 -0800
From: Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); en-US; rv:1.8.1.22) Gecko/20090605 Thunderbird/2.0.0.22 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
References: <20100204043958.79681.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
In-Reply-To: <20100204043958.79681.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1154; t=1265306970; x=1266170970; c=relaxed/simple; s=thundersaddle.kirkwood; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=mtcc.com; i=mike@mtcc.com; z=From:=20Michael=20Thomas=20<mike@mtcc.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Asrg]=20Adding=20a=20spam=20button=20t o=20MUAs |Sender:=20 |To:=20Anti-Spam=20Research=20Group=20-=20IRTF=20<asrg@irtf .org> |Content-Type:=20text/plain=3B=20charset=3DISO-8859-1=3B=20 format=3Dflowed |Content-Transfer-Encoding:=207bit |MIME-Version:=201.0; bh=Fc8ZAEg8afo2+VfEPTDZPtaW1wIjnhe151TGzpNK2e4=; b=BKaPulaD7NTb5fqHu3Ua59wnIOAVIElXdulUwBLyE/lbkUE02l0ihJSnw+ GYLdzl0L4dR/IW7trvH4VyjXRdAl4zgYIE+NrxM0maiNGli6DGBnMfgkKMri ZPV2CaGkIUei1f4z9lTMqEvjOXS3GA6lkqy+/FYXzSarMZUFbMt60=;
Authentication-Results: ; v=0.1; dkim=pass header.i=mike@mtcc.com ( sig from mtcc.com/thundersaddle.kirkwood verified; ); dkim-asp=pass header.From=mike@mtcc.com
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Adding a spam button to MUAs
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 18:08:44 -0000

On 02/03/2010 08:39 PM, John Levine wrote:
>> Would it really be such a sin to just pretend that POP3 doesn't
>> exist/matter? It is a pretty primitive mechanism, after all. Not
>> everything needs to be a 100% solution to be useful.
>
> Well, heck, we could just tell everyone to switch to web mail and we'd
> already be done.
>
> There are a whole lot of people picking up their mail using POP from a
> whole lot of mail systems.  Disks are cheap but they are not free, and
> many ISPs do not want to host the permanent mailstore for their users.
> I agree we don't need a 100% solution, but we really need at least a
> 50% solution.

50%? ::snort::

In any case it hardly matters because POP3 and IMAP are completely different
protocols with different constituencies. You'd never have a standards effort
that lumps them together in a million years, and even if you did you'd do
nothing more than needlessly confuse the programmers of their respective
code bases.

So IMAP could be done really fast and simply, while POP3 -- assuming there's
any constituency at all to push for it -- could lumber along at its own pace.

Mike