|
|
|
|
|
Internet Tip of The Week
|
Author:
Article:
E-mail is an extremely important and effective means of
communication and is used by millions of people, for personal
and commercial purposes. Its convenience and efficiency is
threatened however by the rise in spam. Spam currently accounts
for over half of all e-mail traffic, and most spam is fraudulent
or deceptive in nature.
Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have been attempting to fight
spam over the years. Unfortunately, their efforts have been
less than successful and everyone?s inbox continues to be filled
with this junk on a daily basis. In the last calendar month
alone, I received 62,028 unsolicited e-mails.
ISPs have developed filters of all kinds. Some look for
keywords, and others check for certain punctuation patterns or
word patterns. Some penalize the use of ALL CAPS, or the number
of bad addresses (bounces) which are returned as undeliverable.
Some rely on complaints from their subscribers and will blacklist
someone if a complaint is received.
The worst ISPs simply dump an e-mail without notifying either
party of their action. If I send you an important e-mail for
example, and it violates one of their filters, you will never get
it or know it was sent, and I am not notified it was not
delivered - this is totally unacceptable.
The bottom line is some ISPs are doing more harm than good.
Legitimate e-mails are not getting through in many cases.
Publishers of ?opt in? newsletters and ezines are seeing their
publications summarily ?trashed? by some ISPs or nodes because
they triggered a filter. I defy anyone, who publishes on a
regular basis, to produce a 3,000+ word document, which is
squeaky clean and does not violate at least some of their
filters.
Many spammers harvest addresses from the web. They have software
that searches the web for keywords they specify and they build
targeted lists. Others gather addresses from Newsgroups or
Bulletin Boards. Some of your larger ISPs may be simply trying
to turn a greater profit. If they sell their address lists to
spammers, they then have ?carte blanch? to send anything they
wish, but they then unmercifully dump others without notifying
either the sender or the recipient.
Think about this. I have a screen name with a major service. I
use this to check my e-mail to ensure that my newsletters are
being received by subscribers to that service. On many occasions
it never gets there. My e-mail account does however get pounded
by vile spam of all kinds, that even the most basic filters should
block. That screen name has never been used for any purpose
other than to receive e-mail. It has never appeared on the web or
been used for a Newsgroup or Bulletin Board posting. I wonder
how those spammers got my address.
The Federal Anti-Spam Bill, effective January 1, 2004, sets
requirements for commercial e-mail, including opt-out provisions
and valid postal addresses. It also prohibits misleading subject
lines or fraudulent return addresses. Violators face fines as
well as prison terms.
While there will be a maturation period, this should work. I
really don?t care if someone sends me an unsolicited e-mail as
many times I do receive something of interest. I receive ads
sent through the U.S. Postal Service every day and don?t give it
a second thought. As long as those sending unsolicited e-mail
follow the rules, it is something I can live with.
To make it work however, the ISPs have to stop filtering e-mail.
If I receive something I don?t want and can get off their mailing
list, this is perfectly acceptable to me. How dare the ISPs
presume to be the guardian of my e-mail and summarily block
something I may wish to receive.
I think the ?do not spam? registry is a bad idea. It could
contain millions of e-mail addresses that would have to be
checked whenever bulk e-mail is sent and will drive valuable
publications off the web. There is a difference between bulk
mail and spam. Bulk mail is the only way a publisher can send
their publications to the thousands of people who want them.
While spammers use bulk mail, the difference is in the content
and not the method.
Critics complain that the law sets requirements that, if met,
will grant marketers protection as having sent "legal" spam.
So what! I know it will take some time to iron out all the
wrinkles in this, but when they do, we will have a far better
Internet. This will ultimately give control back to the end
user you and me, the consumers to determine what we want
to receive, and not some faulty filter designed to ?protect us?.
The ISPs can play a critical role in the success or failure of
this legislation. If they continue on their current path, it is
doomed to failure. They must not summarily block any e-mails. If
this federal legislation works, and I think it will, the spam
will stop as the violators will face significant civil and
criminal penalties.
How can you help? Let your ISP know how you feel. If they are
not responsive to this problem, and continue on their current
track, vote with your dollars and switch to one that is. If the
ISPs approach this properly, we will have a solid Internet f or
personal and business use, and valuable e-mail will not be lost.
If they don?t, they will be doing more harm than good.
-----
Did you know that subscribers to Bob Osgoodby's Free Ezine the
"Tip of the Day" get a Free Ad for their Business at his Web
Site? Great Business and Computer Tips - Monday through Friday.
Instructions on how to place your ad are in the Newsletter.
Subscribe Here
Article Submitted - Jan. 5th 2004
|
|
|
|
|
