[15476] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: How to document threats from pro or anti spam terrorists?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steve Sobol)
Tue Feb 24 09:47:33 1998
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 17:33:51 -0500
From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@devel.nacs.net>
To: Sean Finn <seanf@cisco.com>
Cc: Barry Shein <bzs@world.std.com>, dirk@power.net, nanog@merit.edu,
legal@power.net
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19980223183842.009b8690@ntg.cisco.com>; from Sean Finn on Mon, Feb 23, 1998 at 10:38:42AM -0800
On Mon, Feb 23, 1998 at 10:38:42AM -0800, Sean Finn wrote:
>
> When an 'anti-spammer' compromises net access for a group of
> people as a response to percieved "net abuse" on the part of
> a single member of that group, that's a denial of service.
>
> The phrase 'using violence to prevent violence' comes to mind.
>
> (I wouldn't say that my government uses 'moral confusion' to
> justify it's practices, but ... ;)
Examples, please? Off the list, in private e-mail to me, because this
isn't really applicable to nanog. I'd be interested in hearing your examples.
> ... but it's my intuition that nanog might not be the place
> for this particular debate.
ditto.
> (suggestions for a more appropriate forum?)
spam-l, maybe?
***steve scribbles notes to himself to subscribe to that list***
--
Steve Sobol, NACS.NET Technical Support [http://www.nacs.net/support]
sjsobol@nacs.net/sjsobol@nstc.com/sjsobol@apk.net
Moderator, alt.religion.afterburner [http://antispam.nstc.com/ara]
SPAM(tm) belongs in a can, not on a mail server.
