Time: Sun Jul 20 14:31:50 1997
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA13031
	for [address in tool bar]; Sun, 20 Jul 1997 14:31:52 -0700 (MST)
	by usr06.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id OAA09181;
	Sun, 20 Jul 1997 14:30:41 -0700 (MST)
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 1997 14:30:14 -0700
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLF: Reducing Unwanted Email:  An Unsolicited Proposal

         Reducing Unwanted Email:
         An Unsolicited Proposal


          Paul Andrew Mitchell
          All Rights Reserved

After watching and observing the behavior of
Internet email users, I would like to share a
few key observations, and then make a few key
suggestions for managing ourselves, rather than
to have a corrupt Congress try to make criminals
out of all of us -- again.  They should talk!


Despite the availability of "Blind Copy" features,
many users continue to display the entire list of
recipient addresses in their email broadcasts.

This allows recipients to obtain the entire list
which is used in this way, and to build their own
private broadcast lists, by adding each such list
to their own master list(s).

Solutions:  encourage migration to "Blind Copy"
as a recommended mode of use, in all cases.
Email lists can be transmitted like any other
email message -- in the body of the message --
if and when that is the intended purpose of any
given message.


If we receive U.S. Mail with a new address on it,
there is nothing to prevent us from posting unsolicited
printed matter to that address.  This is not only
"legal," but it is also encouraged by the U.S. Postal
Service, which makes tons of money off "junk mail."

There is no real difference between such "junk mail",
and the transmission of unsolicited email messages 
to one or more email addresses which appear on our 
monitor screens and, hence, on our hard disks.

More to the point, outlawing unsolicited email while
permitting unsolicited U.S. Mail, smacks of unequal
protection under the law, and would probably fail
that constitutional test.

Solutions:  allow unsolicited transmission of email
to any email address which appears on our monitor
screens.  If the recipient does not wish to receive
any further unsolicited email from that sender, the
recipient and sender can work it out between the 
two of them.  If senders observe the recommendations
in point #1 above, then it is less likely that entire
lists will be communicated to every address on such


The issue of privacy is a controlling principle,
which is violated when a sender fails to use the
"Blind Copy" feature, or fails to migrate to
software which supports this feature.  This is so
because privacy is still a fundamental Right.

Solutions:  privacy options should be added to 
list servers, wherever possible.  For example,
if John is a member of private list USNEWS,
it should be possible for John to suppress his
own email address when John posts to this list.
As it is now, many list servers display John's
email address when broadcasting John's post
to all the members of that list.  This is a 
clear privacy violation.


Filtering is a well developed software technology,
and yet many users are failing to use it at all,
or to exploit it fully.  For example, if all email
from any given sender is considered "junk" by any
given recipient, it is very easy to route all such
mail into the "trash" file, which is then deleted
automatically upon Exit from the email program.

Solutions:  encourage exploitation and migration
to filtering functions in email software, with
liberal utilization of automatic deletion of
"trash" files.  Another fairly simple solution
is to migrate to larger hard disks.  Industry
projections see 50% reductions in hard disk prices
PER YEAR, for the next 3 to 5 years.  Adding hard
disks, and/or switching to larger hard disk, is
becoming rather routine.  Also, migrating to 
FAT32 systems under Windows 95 SR2 will alleviate the
unnecessary storage overhead caused by FAT16 file
systems on older Windows machines.


These are just some thoughts that have been
rolling around upstairs.  I have tried, whenever
possible, to use the "Blind Copy" feature in
Eudora Pro, because I believe that it is the
best and only way I have to preserve the privacy
of individuals whose email addresses are in my
various email lists (e.g. "Friends", "SLS", 
"Contact Master", "Press Master", etc.)

On the other hand, if someone has sent me email,
whether solicited or not, then I possess that 
individual's email address, which is not likely
to change in the near future.  Providing more
mechanisms to keep email addresses private 
seems to be the best overall solution, imho.

Your comments and suggestions are much appreciated!

If you want us to REMOVE you, you need only ask.
Now that our email lists are better organized,
these requests can be handled much more quickly.

Thank you again, in advance, for your helpful
suggestions and your consideration.

Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Mitchell

Paul Andrew Mitchell                 : Counselor at Law, federal witness
B.A., Political Science, UCLA;  M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine

tel:     (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night
email:   [address in tool bar]       : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU
website: http://www.supremelaw.com   : visit the Supreme Law Library now
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech,  at its best
             Tucson, Arizona state   : state zone,  not the federal zone
             Postal Zone 85719/tdc   : USPS delays first class  w/o this

As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice.  We shall
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal.
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail