[clug] spam attacker

[Peter Barker]

On Mon, 11 Oct 2004, Luke Worth wrote:

> http://www003.portalis.it/115/ladvampire.html
> How many people know about this? seems like a good idea to me.

Argh! Vigilantes!

I'm not in favour. Let's see:
 - typically you only pay for traffic you receive, not send, so while it
might be chewing up their bandwidth, they're not paying for it (much)
 - this is only a handful of spammers; drop in the ocean
 - this unnecessarily chews up internet bandwidth
 - people getting a nice warm fuzzy feeling for "helping to fight spam" in
a destructive manner when they should be trying to get nice warm fuzzy
feelings doing something constructive :)
 - most people hate spammers. A LOT of people hate the opposite extremes
of politics; do we start to condone this sort of attack against political
parties we don't agree with? (extend to other contentious issues...)

> Luke

Yours,
-- 
Peter Barker                          |   N    _--_|\ /---- Barham, Vic
Programmer,Sysadmin,Geek              | W + E /     /\
pbarker at barker.dropbear.id.au         |   S   \_,--?_*<-- Canberra
You need a bigger hammer.             |             v    [35S, 149E]
Thu Jan  8 12:27:35 2004  	nigelw - Comments added
[pbarker - Wed Jan  7 18:23:13 2004]:
> You are in a maze of twisty semantics. You have: a hammer.
You miss the semantic. \The semantic hits you. \You are permenantly confused.