Re: Dealing with abusive multiple posts
- From: Richard Henry <pomerado@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 21 Apr 2007 17:45:47 -0700
On Apr 21, 2:02 pm, Joerg <notthisjoerg...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Paul E. Schoen wrote:
I was unpleasantly surprised to see the string of maybe 100 multiple posts
concerning the stupid MassiveProng thing, and it really detracted from my
ability to read other headers. However, I found that, using my Outlook
Express newsreader, I was able to permanently delete them. ...
If anyone figures out how to do that in Mozilla please let us all know.
... If only the same
thing could be done throughout Usenet, to remove such obvious trash, which
seems to have been done specifically to compromise the usefulness of
Usenet.
Unfortunately that would leave the vulnerability of abusive deletions.
This sort of abuse is IMHO much worse than the occasional spam, and borders
on the seriousness of a virus. What is to stop someone from creating a
robotic post generator sending thousands of garbage posts to selected
newgroups that they want to cripple? How can the perps be traced and
effectively neutralized (creative ideas are brewing in my mind).
It is perhaps a sensitive issue to permit any sort of filtering or
censorship not directly controlled by the recipient. Is there a solution
for unmoderated newsgroups? Can there be some sort of automatic detection
and rejection system that would intercept such "attacks" and render them
harmless? An internet SDI?
One solution I have been trying to propose, for email spam, is to charge a
universal tax of perhaps $0.01 per email sent. This would certainly not
bother me, or most individuals, because if I send 25 emails (or posts) in a
day, that is a lot, and I would happily spend a quarter to be assured that
my inbox (or spam filter) is not clogged with a hundred emails that I need
to go through to pick out the occasion false catch. If it saves me 5
minutes, my time is certainly worth more than what I spent.
Legitimate business users can deduct this "tax" as a legitimate expense.
Perhaps a "bulk permit" could be offered, with the assurance that any
recipient could actually opt out.
The funds generated by such a "tax" could be used to find and prosecute
those who create and distribute viruses or other malware.
Nah! No new taxes. Seriously. It would mean another big fat bureaucracy,
make politicians of the "tax'em - spend it" category drool over a new
revenue source, and exclude a lot of people. Not just Internet cafes.
Think about all the people who must subsist on less than one Dollar a
day. Not everyone has it as good as we do.
--
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
No new bureaucracy needed. Let the ISPs keep it.
.
- References:
- Dealing with abusive multiple posts
- From: Paul E. Schoen
- Re: Dealing with abusive multiple posts
- From: Joerg
- Dealing with abusive multiple posts
- Prev by Date: Re: How have you customized your life -- electronically?
- Next by Date: Re: Dealing with abusive multiple posts
- Previous by thread: Re: Dealing with abusive multiple posts
- Next by thread: Re: Dealing with abusive multiple posts
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
