Why not allow empty code blocks?

[Gordon Levi]

"D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy at Vex.Net> wrote:

>On Mon, 01 Aug 2016 00:25:58 +1000
>Gordon Levi <gordon at address.invalid> wrote:
>> "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy at Vex.Net> wrote:
>> >I don't care if you are using carrier pigeon.  If you send an email
>> >address, make it a valid one.
>> 
>> I admire those who use a valid email address on Usenet but it is an
>> open invitation for spammers. I doubt if there is anybody who uses
>> their primary email address.
>
>I never said that he had to use his primary address, just a valid one.
>
>On the other hand I have no throwaway accounts.  Every address I use is
>a primary one.  I have all sorts of methods to block spam.  None of
>those methods involves moving my spam problem to someone else.

How do you manage to avoid the resources wasted on multiple mail
servers in order for the spam to each you just so that you can block
it?
>
>But what do I know?  I'm just some old fart who grew up being taught
>that society works best when you consider the other guy and take
>responsibility for your own messes.  Old fashioned ideas I know.

Nearly twenty years ago The Internet Engineering Task Force produced
RFC2606 so that I could consider the other guy and use .invalid as a
TLD. It makes a false email address instantly recognisable. If it is
not recognised by a person it will be recognised and bounced by a
nearby mail server using minimum computer resources.