[thelist] Serious antispam measures

[Kelly Hallman]

Apr 19 at 1:55pm, Kasimir K wrote:
> ...if you require something in the message, and inform the senders about
> this requirement automatically (e.g with auto reply), then then people
> you don't know will be able to contact you.

As I said, I think this is an ill-conceived strategy. It's unfortunate 
that spam causes people to resort to these solutions, but putting the 
burden on legitimate emailers is an ugly solution.
 
> ...so they drop me a line. If I use a white list, and reject mails not
> found on it, I've just lost business. But if I instead auto reply them
> with instruction "please include phrase 'I want a web site by kasimir-k'
> in your message" (just an example phrase), they will be able to email
> me. The requirement is easy enough...

I'm afraid such an auto-reply message is likely going to cause you to lose 
business anyway. Whatever my purpose for contacting you might be, sending 
me an email reply like that is a sure way to keep me from pursuing it.

The other problem with any type of auto-reply instructions is that it 
generates even more email, much of it going into the ether--responding to 
every email address that sends you spam. The cost of spam is largely due 
to an excess of email traffic; doubling it isn't a great solution.

-- 
Kelly Hallman
// Ultrafancy