[RFCI-Discuss] Posit: abuse@aol.com

[Administrative Account]

	Maybe it is just me, but this seems to be a very easy situation
to describe.  AOL's position is well backed up, and has clear justification
under existing "best practices" and RFCs - they get > some number of similar
complaints within a time frame and stop listening.  They do accept the first
"n" complaints, and (we have to assume) will at some point accept more from
the same IPs or email addresses;  So AOL *is* RFC compliant.

	But, not guilty and innocent are completely different things;  AOL
is guilty of abusing their own stature as an "800 pound gorilla" and imposing
limits on abuse complaints without actually handling complaints at the rate
which they are capable of generating abuse - Basically "We're big, so we can
choose how to handle things ourselves".  This doesn't cause them to be in
violation of any RFCs - just shows that in some cases they are "bad neighbors"
(or pick your own more or less inflammatory phrase).  This has a lot of seeming
similarity to the discussion a month or so ago about Microsoft:  The RFC said
they had to look over the complaints, not actually do anything;  We don't have
to like it, but AOL seems firmly on the side of RFC compliance (letter of the
law, not necessarily the "spirit of the law").

	Paul Shupak
	hostmaster at plectere.com