Maybe one of the reasons the right-side of the political spectrum are
more aggressive spammers, is that it's a knock-on effect from being
marginalized within mainstream channels and leftist BigTech platforms.
Maybe if it was a more level playing field they'd feel less inclined to
do so.
- mark
On 2023-08-26 11:05 PM, Jarland Donnell via mailop wrote:
That's been a lot of my finding as well. While I fully empathize with
efforts to tackle bias, spam from affiliates of the RNC is worse than
their counterparts. Mainstream bias is worse in the opposite
direction, spam is worse in this direction. It's quite fair to notice
the flaws from every angle and that they're different (regardless of
whether or not anyone feels they're equal, just different).
Given that I'm more likely to be biased in the opposite direction,
it's noteworthy that I see more spam from affiliates of the
complainant in this case. They're more numerous, they're more
clickbaity, and they're more often targeted at people who didn't
consent via any double opt-in procedure.
So, a solid win for all of us.
On 2023-08-26 14:54, Rob McEwen via mailop wrote:
BigTech is overflowing with extreme-leftist bias - especially with
their social media fact-checkers - and (to a lesser extent) this bias
overflows into their spam filtering and search results - HOWEVER -
the RNC and so many right-wing politicians are among the WORST to try
such a lawsuit because the RNC, and many of their affiliates, spam
like crazy and are OFTEN using shady-as-hell practices, such as using
crappy third party senders who sent to 100% purchased lists, in
addition to sending from newly-bought domains with zero reputation.
It's a cesspool. And they make some of the most unethical low-rent
ESPs wealthy in the process. The owners of some of those of those
ESPs are spoiled rotten rich brats who think that rules don't apply
to them. Likewise, every time I'm dealing with their spam, and I
think about the CEOs of these shady ESPs they're using - I get this
image in my mind of one or another of the shady drug dealers in the
movie, Boogie Nights. THAT is who they really are! (I have inside
info about them - this is a good summary of what these people are like!)
I do know of a few ethical ESPs that cater to conservative
politicians and who do send ethically/correctly - but they are few
and far between. Ironically, that the RNC tried this complaint - will
only make the leftist bias from BigTech - worse!
Likewise, the Republican bill to unravel 47US230 - is a total
disaster - and all co-sponsoring that are either idiots are didn't
even hardly read it. 47US230 probably needs improvement because it's
somewhat abused - but their proposed fix utterly fails to understand
how much 47US230 protects antispam and antimalware "good guys" from
being run out of business bu frivolous slapp lawsuits. Everyone will
suffer greatly if 47US230 is altered or replaced in an unwise way.
Rob McEwen, invaluement
------ Original Message ------
From "Anne Mitchell via mailop" <mailop@mailop.org>
To "Gellner, Oliver via mailop" <mailop@mailop.org>
Date 8/26/2023 2:29:46 PM
Subject [mailop] RNC v. Google Dispositioin
I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned this here, because it was a
big win for Gmail plus has language which is applicable to any ISP.
In the order (in which the RNC complaint was dismissed) the court
basically not only smacked down the RNC, but made clear that the
Communications Decency Act (i.e. Federal Law) was developed in part to:
"encourage the development of technologies which maximize user
control over what information is received by individuals, families,
and schools who use the Internet and other interactive computer
services"
..and the court goes on to say that "Permitting suits to go forward
against a service provider based on the over-filtering of mass
marketing emails would discourage providers from offering spam
filters or significantly decrease the number of emails segregated.
It would also place courts in the business of micromanaging content
providers filtering systems in contravention of Congresss directive
that it be the provider or user that determines what is objectionable".
There's a lot more, it's a great opinion (full text of the court
order is included in our article):
https://www.isipp.com/blog/rnc-v-google-republican-national-committee-gets-smacked-down-by-court-full-text-of-order-here/
Anne
---
Anne P. Mitchell
Attorney at Law
Email Law & Policy Attorney
CEO Institute for Social Internet Public Policy (ISIPP)
Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal email
marketing law)
Author: The Email Deliverability Handbook
Board of Directors, Denver Internet Exchange
Dean Emeritus, Cyberlaw & Cybersecurity, Lincoln Law School
Prof. Emeritus, Lincoln Law School
Chair Emeritus, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
Counsel Emeritus, eMail Abuse Prevention System (MAPS)
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
--
Mark E. Jeftovic <mar...@easydns.com>
Co-founder & CEO easyDNS Technologies Inc.
+1-(416)-535-8672 ext 225
/"Never expect a thing you do not want,
and never desire a thing you do not expect."
-- Bob Proctor /
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
