involuntary spam filtering: STOP IT! [PTN.20020226.0090F]

[Gary Lawrence Murphy]

>>>>> "K" == Kragen Sitaker <kragen@pobox.com> writes:

    K> Meng Weng Wong writes:
    >> ...  While I wish I could immediately accommodate you and the
    >> others who feel the way you do, unfortunately current
    >> technology requires that we implement the above restrictions on
    >> a universal basis.

(sigh) Excuse my butting in, but if the technology /does/ /not/ /work/
for the business requirements, is it acceptable to redefine the
business requirements to fit the crippled technology?  Doesn't it make
more sense to /delay/ deployment of this 'service' until the
technology /is/ suitable?

<rant class="predictable">
"Technology requires that we implement the above restrictions" is
bullshit, quite frankly, a cop-out, passing the buck to a faceless
non-entity.  What it likely means is "spam makes more work for /us/ so
to reduce our operations cost, we are reducing your quality of service
and we will blame someone else so you don't ask for a rebate" or
perhaps "Majority rules: In our recent survey, 65% of our customers
thought the side-effects of the cure was better than the disease"
Was there such a poll?  Or are the inmates running that asylum? (the
SP in ISP is for "Service Provider")
</rant>

No technology ever put a gun to anyone's head and said "implement my
incomplete, broken version, or you die". Figuratively or otherwise.

"Technology should serve the body, not enslave the mind."
(William S Burroughs' Nike commercial - one of the great moments in TV)

-- 
Gary Lawrence Murphy <garym@teledyn.com> TeleDynamics Communications Inc
Business Innovations Through Open Source Systems: http://www.teledyn.com
"Computers are useless.  They can only give you answers."(Pablo Picasso)