on Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 08:14:43AM -0500, Kirk Strauser ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > At 2003-08-03T04:13:26Z, "Karsten M. Self" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > <proofread> > > > Effective spam management tools should place the burden either > > on the spammer, or at the very least, on the person receiving > > the benefits of the filtering (the mail recipient). Instead, > > challenge-response puts the burden on, at best, a person not > > directly benefitting, and quite likely (read on). > > ...and quite likely what? Purple? Annoyed? Tall?
Yeah, yeah. That's been updated to "...quite likely (read on) a completely innocent party". Which still isn't quite the correct connotation. I'm looking at the case of mailing list-triggered C-R. > > The mechanics of C-R systems lead to a fairly high probability > > that users of such > > ...systems disappear without a trace? Thanks. "...users of such systems will fail to receive non-spam messages, of potentially very high significance". Appreciated, Kirk. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Backgrounder on the Caldera/SCO vs. IBM and Linux dispute. http://sco.iwethey.org/
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
