| Jeff Abrahamson on 12 Mar 2004 17:02:02 -0000 |
|
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 10:50:37AM -0500, Walt Mankowski wrote: > [12 lines, 95 words, 503 characters] Top characters: enosirl\n > > On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 10:38:40AM -0500, Jeff Abrahamson wrote: > > Presumably fees are a few pennies or even fractions of pennies. > > Enough to discourage sending millions, insignificant when sending > > one. And it's returned by senders who don't view you as a spammer. > > > > I don't see the meat of your objection. > > Well, suppose it costs 1 penny to send an email, and there are 1000 > people on the plug list. Does it cost $10 to send an email to the > list? That would sure cut down on traffic. :) You'd be mailing to the list, so that's only one for you. The list would have to resend, though. Either an architecture would allow fee-free email (say the one I outlined this morning, where I can grant an address for that purpose) or else lists would change form, just as usenet news groups became lists when usenet started getting heavily spammed. My own feeling, though, is that people should pay for bandwidth (as we do now: DCA isn't giving me this link for free) and what you do with it is your business. My baysian spam filter, for example, is doing an excellent job of keeping me from seeing stuff I don't want to be bothered with, and procmail helps with the rest. I have mozilla configured not to show me unrequested popups. If I cared I could block images from doubleclick. Etc. -- Jeff Jeff Abrahamson <http://www.purple.com/jeff/> GPG fingerprint: 1A1A BA95 D082 A558 A276 63C6 16BF 8C4C 0D1D AE4B Attachment:
signature.asc
|
|