Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 02:46:13 +1100 (EST)
From: lpellen-AT-enternet.com.au (Luke Pellen)
Subject: The future of electronic spiced ham [ChildXXX].


My thoughts as regards the notorious Child-XXX SPAM:


Is it the information on the can - the packaging - that is offensive? Well,
I won't even attempt to elaborate on this angle, as Pierre has said quite
enough.

Is it the spam itself that is offensive? Infringing upon our democratic
freedoms by force feeding us some neatly packaged offal? A fascist act that
must be addressed?

In many ways I am in agreement with William Elston, I don't see this as
particularly important; to address this act internet-wide seems to me a
little pre-emptive, reactionary and a tad paranoid [just a little!]. Now, I
am not saying that I will have no part in the matter, or that I am deeply
opposed to any group action, or that I wouldn't support a majority decision
to address this issue.

My reasons are simply that I see spams [such as the ChildXXX] as indicators
of inferior technology, and not as any "fascist threat to liberal
democracy". We can attempt to stop these things at their source, perhaps
through mass discussion and mass action - a very difficult and time
consuming task; or we can prevent such things at our end through internet
software that intelligently takes care of such matters. The two are
functionally equivalent acts: either way the spam becomes invisible and thus
ineffective.

My focus would be on developing such "protection" software. If people want
to shower shit on us, why not just use an umbrella?


Luke.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
e-mail: lpellen-AT-enternet.com.au
   WWW: http://people.enternet.com.au/~lpellen/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------