Slashdot Mirror
Spamhaus Guru Steve Linford Profiled
BenLev writes "The New York Times has an article profiling Spamhaus Project director Steve Linford. The feature goes behind the scenes at Spamhaus, 'one of the leading groups that is trying to make the world safe from junk e-mail', showing that it operates from Linford's houseboat on the Thames near London, spammers don't like him, and his volunteer corps likens itself to the X-Men."
1) That's 3 clicks per email * the rate at which you gets spams. It adds up after a while
I receive quite a bit of spam. I'll grant you that it does take a bit of dealing with everytime I fire up my mailbox, both at home and at work, it certainly doesn't have an appreciable effect on my schedule.
2) There's always the chance of a type 2 error - you could lose (either through accidental blocking or unintetional deleteing) an important email.
I don't understand how you think this criticism applies to allowing spam but not to blocking spam. It's pretty clear that it happens whether you allow spam or attempt to block it in the way that's being discussed.
3) You pay for the bandwidth that they waste, in the long run. They are simply shifting the price of getting in touch with you from themselves to you. In effect, they are calling you on your dime.
How is this the case?