[anti-abuse-wg] "abuse-c:" - a question....with no answers?

Sorry didn't cc in the list,

Regards,

Hal
> Hal ponton <mailto:hal at buzcom.net>
> 31 March 2017 at 09:53
> Andre,
>
> The issue I see with two contacts (emergency and standard) is that 
> everyone will email the emergency contact.
>
> I fully agree that the response required for 1 spam email vs 10000 
> emails is vastly different, however, if someone wants a response they 
> will email the account they think they'd get the fastest / best 
> response from. It's just human nature.
>
> Whilst at first non-emergency complaints will be ignored, it will get 
> to a "boy who cried wolf" situation where the amount of non-emergency 
> emails vastly outweighs the emergency emails. To the point where the 
> organisation will just treat the emergency mailbox the same as the 
> current abuse mailbox.
>
> You would need some disincentive to email the emergency mailbox. Like 
> on a train where if you pull the emergency handle without there being 
> an emergency you get a fine. I'm not advocating a fine here, just 
> something similar to try and regulate emails coming into the emergency 
> mailbox.
>
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20170331/fa1a4497/attachment.html>