On Mon, 29 Oct 2001, Juha Saarinen wrote:
On Sun, 28 Oct 2001, Joe Abley wrote:
You seem to be saying that your customers get different treatment when you receive reports of abuse depending on what line of business they are in. That seems surprising. I think what Seeby might be saying, albeit obliquely, is that Orcon doesn't want to become the next AOL by cutting off downstream ISPs, thus joepardising its revenue base.
I understand Seeby's stance and believe a strong warning is required. However based on Bruce Simpson's report (aardvark today), Philip Hunt's definition of spam is somewhat different to ours. So it sounds like he needs to be educated as to what UCE means. I do think that wholesale suppliers (remind me to check with my boss) should ensure their contracts with ppl they supply contain clauses of what happens when AUP/T&C is breached. Unfortunately at this day and age, the fact that they are an ISP doesn't mean they know much about netiquette. Example of what happens to suppliers who do not have such clauses would be to look at what happened to the company that was the ISP of Spamford (sp) Wallace (Thanks to Simon Lyall for reminding me of this).
Also, imagine all the customer poaching spamming that would take place if Orcon went tits-up. Doesn't bear thinking about, really. Definitely not. However now that he has been warned, if he does it again, I think Orcon should terminate the contract.
regards Lin [ Perhaps I should have bought a can or two of spam while it was on special at foodtown when I saw it on Sat and sent it to strongnet. ] --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog