ORBS

[Ray Dillinger]

You know what?  If Alice  puts up a list of all the sites 
she's blocking mail from, there is no problem with that.  
She is not coercing anyone. She can block any site for any 
reason she wants -- maybe she has intestinal gas, or maybe 
she just doesn't like somebody.  Tough toenails.

If Bob reads this list and copies it, there is no problem 
with that either -- Bob's not coercing anyone.  

Bob winds up blocking the people Alice blocked, even if she 
blocked them for no good reason.  But Bob is evidently okay 
with that, or at least unable to find a better source of 
information.

If Alice were in a competitive business, and people paid for 
better or more well-founded recommendations  about blocking 
lists, she'd probably be driven out of business. But whatever; 
nobody else got into the business, so there's no competition.
Alice has a money-losing monopoly that provides marginal 
service.  

The only problem arises because Alice started using scans and 
listings as weapons.  That's not wrong per se, as it's not 
stealing or coercion -- it's just rude.  But scans themselves 
are perfectly acceptable and necessary as the only reliable 
means of providing this service. 

I think ORBS was exactly the kind of "reputation service" most 
folks here argue in favor of, and while some of us may have 
despised it, that's not sufficient reason to interfere with 
someone else's ability to publish whatever the hell they want 
to publish.

Or, I'll even go further.  It was an example of "private law",
where the "law merchant" publishes a list of people who break 
the laws they sell and then lets the market punish or not as 
they choose.  However flawed the list, and however obnoxious 
the merchant was about the testing to create it, isn't that 
exactly what many of you have been arguing for the right to do?

			Bear