On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:35:53 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > You misunderstand me. I believe *LESS* red tape will mean > better service. Today, an email operator has to deal with > numerous blacklisting and spam-hunting groups, many of which > act in secret and none of which have any accountability, either > to email operators, email users or the public.
Actually, most of those blacklisting groups have the *ultimate* accountability to e-mail operators - if the operators disagree with the way the group does things, they stop using the blacklist. I'm making the rash assumption that operators are klooed enough to either not use a blacklist they don't agree with, or know how to whitelist their disagreements. If the operator isn't, well.. consider it time for evolution in action. > I'd like to see all of this inscrutable red tape swept aside > with a single open and public organization that I have been And you intend to get enough consensus of goal amongst all these divergent groups with their differing goals and criteria, how, exactly? Remember that we as an industru (at least as represented on NANOG) can't even come to an agreement about port 587 or filtering 1918-sourced addresses. ;)
pgp1Cdb7EYIdq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
