[SpamCop-List] Re: IBM spamming?

[Mike Easter]

Mike Easter wrote:

> Or, to say my thing in yet another way;

... or yet another way...

You and/or the public at large, could make an algorithm with a proper
flowsheet which could include these forks and loops.

 - I /only/ want to handle my inbox efficiently, unfrustrated by spam [Y
N]
 - I am satisfied to be a /passive/ but pledged antispammer, discarding
*all* [not just some] spam unread and unopened
 - I do [Y N] want to be a silly spamreader^1
 - I am [Y N] going to do any /active/ spamfighting or reporting
 - I am [Y N] going to be a spamcop reporter [Quick Regular]
 - I am [Y N] going to do advanced spamfighting^2

^1 This is a touchy subject much debated by those in alt.spam  and other
venues who don't like my point of view.  It is very complex, because in
order to discuss its ramifications throughly without making any
assumptions, it would be necessary for the debaters to 'observe' the
debated and contested and unknown behaviors and configurations of the
spamreader/s

^2 This integrates with 1, so that we won't confuse silly spamreaders
with advanced spamfighters..  The issue of whether or not there are any
silly spamreaders among advanced spamfighters is an especially touchy
subject


-- 
Mike Easter
kibitzer, not SC admin