Re: With all this SPAM


"John" <nohj@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:w_-dneY-5dxtuPPVnZ2dnUVZ_hadnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Richard Knoppow wrote:

So, do you mean that no one should ever complain?

No, Richard, that is not what I meant. I mean that you
should not become frustrated if you find no response from
the servers' manager, or if the SPAM continues under new
names and addresses.

Should we just like it and lump it?

No.

A news server is a piece of machinery, it can't be
responsible for anything. All news servers are operated
by some entity, an ISP or a service. They are responsible
for enforcing what ever acceptable use conditions they
specify in their contracts with subscribers.

Acceptable use to whom? The reader or the poster? Note how
many providers have a conspicuous absence of terms
regarding guaranteed filtering of content. You see, it is
best to have no terms to defend in court when the filters
fail than to state something because the truth is that
usenet has too much traffic to monitor.

They have the right to refuse service to anyone who
violates their rules.

First, there is no "anyone". The SPAMmers use false names
and so-forth. They have it all automated so they just peck
and poke and pester with no hands-on involvement.

Some operators of news servers may choose to ignore the
rules but not all are so irresponsible.
Did you just ignore spammers on the system you
managed?

It was impossible to manage all the posts. Since usernames
are automatically contrived and changed frequently,
filtering one simply made no difference and if I filtered
the domain it would hinder thousands of people who use the
domain in a legitimate way.

Filtering is not done by message but by subscriber.
Control of subscribers must be done by e-mail addresses
but that can be backed up by asking for actual snail mail
addresses or real telephone numbers to help control those
who resubscribe with different e-mail addresses.

Usenet is largely free. Richard, you have been around
since its inception, no? It is one of the very last
remnants of the old network that existed in the spirit of
sharing. It has gone the way of the tragedy of the
commons.

Unfortunately, Google Groups seems to be
particularly irresponsible or, perhaps, they are just too
large to respond promptly. However, I have filed
complaints with Google about spammers and have seen those
spammers disappear after a relatively short time.

Google is so very wealthy that it can put a dozen people
on the task whereas no one else can, and still the traffic
is too great. You see certain SPAMmers disappear because
the usernames are changed automatically, by a program, and
not necessarily because Google filters the name.

An ISP certainly knows the source of posts or can be
sure it does.
Usenet is NOT free, that is a very serious misconception.
Its payed for as part of your ISP subscription. The idea
that any of the internet is free is a curious myth.
I am very well aware of the origins of internet.
All ISPs have some rules about acceptable use included
in their contracts. Violation of those rules can result in
their dropping an account. They may choose not to enforce
those rules and not much can be done about that but many
ISPs do enforce their user agreements.
Acceptable to who, well acceptable according to the user
agreements mentioned above.
There are certainly a lot of outlaws prowling around
news groups, and, indeed, the entire internet, a sort of
electronic grafitti. The one thing that can work and has
worked in the past is continuing complaint from paying
customers of service providers.
Of course legislation could stop spam but I am not sure
I want to see control of the internet fall into the hands of
government any more than it already is.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx


.