Josh Miller wrote:
On 08/11/2011 11:12 AM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Josh Miller wrote:
In fact, that is one of the single most effective mechanisms used to combat spam, in my experience and will cut down the amount accepted at the gateway(s) by up to 95%.
I'm not sure who you're answering or agreeing with, but my point is still that 90% of everybody blocked has no clue whatever about what to do about it, and esp. the people with infected systems. A standard channel *to* an ISP for this kind of technical issue - either the ISP notifying the spammer that their machine needs to be cleaned before they'll be allowed back online, or between ISP, would do
<snip>
*I* see from that is that people simply drop, or change services, and nothing gets fixed.
<snip>
Also, where I'm from (greater Seattle area even), you don't have much choice as far as ISPs go, so changing service providers is not a big option.
Yup. That's true most places (competition, *hah*). And all the major ISP's I've dealt with since the conglomeration in Chicago of ISP's about 11 years ago have been the same: common carrier, but not understanding (as I think of it) that spam is the same as problem noise on the line.
mark