IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Asrg] Summary/outline of why the junk button idea is pre-failed

Ian Eiloart <iane@sussex.ac.uk> Thu, 04 March 2010 15:34 UTC

Return-Path: <iane@sussex.ac.uk>
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 B9F9D28C0F2 for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Mar 2010 07:34:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.963
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.963 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.520, 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 9dL-likxV1cV for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Mar 2010 07:34:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lynndie.uscs.susx.ac.uk (lynndie.uscs.susx.ac.uk [139.184.14.87]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D6353A88B8 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 4 Mar 2010 07:34:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lewes.staff.uscs.susx.ac.uk ([139.184.135.133]:62417) by lynndie.uscs.susx.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.64) (envelope-from <iane@sussex.ac.uk>) id KYRKN5-000JOJ-5A for asrg@irtf.org; Thu, 04 Mar 2010 15:35:29 +0000
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 15:34:29 +0000
From: Ian Eiloart <iane@sussex.ac.uk>
Sender: iane@sussex.ac.uk
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
Message-ID: <D73E0743B7352CB264EA102D@lewes.staff.uscs.susx.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <4B8FC0A6.3060903@nd.edu>
References: <20100302131810.GA22938@gsp.org> <4B8D3FD1.8090403@nortel.com> <BF533A28DBE487489EAB3411C5412CBE1032EE5B@BD01MSXMB015.US.Cingular.Net> <41D5397E-E5B8-4508-9393-E25CB307641F@thenose.net> <4B8FC0A6.3060903@nd.edu>
Originator-Info: login-token=Mulberry:01w6p3hCwL5ekEF8vmL9A2H+r3KSKY3ibQOBU=; token_authority=support@its.sussex.ac.uk
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Mac OS X)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Sussex: true
X-Sussex-transport: remote_smtp
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Summary/outline of why the junk button idea is pre-failed
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 Mar 2010 15:34:35 -0000

--On 4 March 2010 09:16:06 -0500 Paul Russell <prussell@nd.edu> wrote:

> On 3/4/2010 08:59, Dennis Dayman wrote:
>> Interesting article
>>
>> http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=1
>> 23574
>>
>
> The author is not interested in reducing or eliminating spam; he simply
> wants tools to validate his delusion that his spam is not spam.

Solicited marketing is not spam. For example, if I subscribe to my local 
cinema's weekly listings by email, then that email is solicited marketing. 
No problem there, as long as I can easily opt out again when I want to.

Furthermore, if the cinema has a variety of messages - weekly listings, 
film reviews, special offers, etc, then it would be a good idea to get 
feedback on what each subscriber likes, so that the cinema can target each 
message at people who like them.

Personally, I'd rather get that stuff from an RSS feed. But, it would still 
be nice if the feed had similar feedback mechanisms.

-- 
Ian Eiloart
IT Services, University of Sussex
01273-873148 x3148
For new support requests, see http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email