On Sun, 22 Sep 2002 17:59:54 -0400, you wrote: >If we really want to stop spam, we need to lobby for effective laws that >will put the cost - in the form of fines - back on the spammers. The TCPA >offers a useful model. While we're at it, we should toss in something about >forging headers, and perhaps slap the hands of people hosting open relays >and/or insecure servers.
An effective combination of: 1) efficient micromoney, and 2) secure ID of sender (or some required ID for 'anonymous' mail) would allow an (perhaps optional) system of e-postage. I would propose that a portion of the 'stamp' be credited to the ISP, and a portion to the recipient. Advertising would then subsidize both the infrastructure and the users. E-postage is politically incorrect. But e-postage would render spam a non-problem. The *entire* problem with spam is cost-shifting from the spammer to the user. Getting a small amount of money every time somebody sent me an email would be wonderful -- but the amount of spam would instantly drop to zero, so there probably wouldn't be enough to pay my ISP bill. While waiting for that, I would settle for the so-called 'Baysian' filtering (which was recently written up in Slashdot, and appears to have nothing to do with real Baysian filters). But the real solution is e-postage. End Spam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> see http://law.spamcon.org for free suespammers.org email account _______________________________________________ spamcon-general mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.spamcon.org/mailman/listinfo/spamcon-general#subscribers Subscribe, unsubscribe, etc: Use the URL above or send "help" in body of message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Contact administrator: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
