wrote:
>
Incidentally NUK, which of those bills do you favor? Just curious.
>
Moi
None! The current situation is what I thrive on. While Torricelli and
a few
others certainly have some appeal because they legitimize spam,
the results
would be pretty disastrous: a HUMONGOUS amount of spam
in the short-run that
would make people even more upset than they are
now, and 2) a bunch of newbie
companies would be looking for more
"experienced spammers" to send their mail.
While that would help me
out big-time very quickly, it would also mean the
resurgence of
Spamford,Rines,Hufnal, and other cretins that have destroyed
the
medium and would F%$# it up even more if it was legitimized. I
think
legislation making spam legit would soon lead to a very firm ban of
it
right afterwards.
I don't think there is anyway there will not be legislation passed in
some
form in 1998 about UCE, and I guess Torricelli would be my choice
as a
spammer. No matter which, spamming is doomed to failure over the
long-term,
and the profits are short-term only. With Torricelli, a
large amount of money
could be made by a spammer like me for a few
months, and then I think the
enormous outcry from too much spam would
spell the legal end of spam.
As it is now, it's tough for people to spam without hijacking or
forging or
trying to abuse ISP's with a $20 a month account. That has
been a real
windfall for me the past several months(and the IRS too it
looks like:). The
less competition, the better. Torricelli=lots of
competition, and a quick
death to UCE.
I can see where every anti-spammer would favor Smith. Probably your
least
favorite would be Torricelli, but I have a feeling the result of
Torricelli in
action would cause spam to die forever with something
like the Smith bill
following it0. You know how damn wishy-washy and
namby-pamby Congress is: they
hate to do anything definitive or
concrete because they are afraid one voter
or donor out of million
will be mad. They'll probably take a stab at the spam
issue by
"regulating it," and making it a big mess with something
like
Torricelli. After that, something like Smith will be
overwhelmingly
supported as every netizen and ISP screams about the massive
amount of
UCE.
I can honestly see 200-300 UCE's per USER if Torricelli passes. I
think that
is something horrifying that would spur efforts to ban spam
with legislation
that almost every congressman would endorse and plow
it through any red-tape
or watering-down.. Certainly I don't want to
compete with 299 other messages
going into someone's mailbox or see
the Internet completely destroyed.