> Try to take the whole post in at once - I know
> the MTV generation has a low attention span, but
> it's only one paragraph. Perhaps you missed your
> Ritalin dose this morning?

My, aren't you the pleasant one?

> > Unless people from Washington are receiving
> > less spam

> That's pretty much implied by the part of my
> post that you didn't quote (you know, about how
> WA residents are sueing - and winning - and
> collecting) from spammers.

It may have been implied, but in my experience it's wrong. I lived in Washington State for my entire life, until approximately a year and a half ago. I even registered under the WAISP directory of Washington State email account holders, soon after the law was passed.

A year and a half ago, I moved to California.

Over the last several years - the previous couple in particular - I'd say that at least 75% of my email is spam. And I get a _lot_ of email.

While I'm happy to see that the two states I've lived in happen to be the ones that have the toughest anti-spam laws in this country, it's pretty clear that they haven't done a whole lot of actual meaningful good.

The only thing that has made email useful for me is SpamAssassin (www.spamassassin.org).

(And in any case, 99.99% of WA state email holders don't even know about the law, and haven't registered their email addresses so that spammers can filter them out ... So it's even more worthless to the majority of the state's populace)