[Asrg] Economic methods for controlling spam (was [Yet another] article on spam)

Yakov Shafranovich <research@solidmatrix.com> Fri, 23 May 2003 19:29 UTC

Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA22182 for <asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Fri, 23 May 2003 15:29:44 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h4NJTH323550 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 23 May 2003 15:29:17 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4NJTHB23547 for <asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org>; Fri, 23 May 2003 15:29:17 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA22171; Fri, 23 May 2003 15:29:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19JICi-0001Yh-00; Fri, 23 May 2003 15:27:49 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19JICi-0001Ye-00; Fri, 23 May 2003 15:27:48 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4NJMjB23170; Fri, 23 May 2003 15:22:45 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4NJLaB23106 for <asrg@optimus.ietf.org>; Fri, 23 May 2003 15:21:36 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA21925 for <asrg@ietf.org>; Fri, 23 May 2003 15:21:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19JI5H-0001Ug-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 23 May 2003 15:20:07 -0400
Received: from 000-238-702.area5.spcsdns.net ([68.27.171.197] helo=68.27.171.197) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 19JI5F-0001Ud-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 23 May 2003 15:20:06 -0400
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030523151414.00b94dc8@std5.imagineis.com>
X-Sender: research@solidmatrix.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
To: asrg@ietf.org
From: Yakov Shafranovich <research@solidmatrix.com>
In-Reply-To: <004b01c320a7$06f0d6a0$0301a8c0@nv6881>
References: <Law12-F103NQYsvm2K60000ac0d@hotmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-MimeHeaders-Plugin-Info: v2.03.00
X-GCMulti: 1
Subject: [Asrg] Economic methods for controlling spam (was [Yet another] article on spam)
Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/asrg/>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 15:20:26 -0400

At 06:13 AM 5/23/2003 +0900, Shannon Jacobs wrote:

>However, with email we have the potential to do much better if we devise the
>proper economic model. Right now the spammers are forcing us to spend
>additional money handling their spam. More machines for filtering. Lawyers
>to write more laws. Why can't we turn that around and spend money to offer
>better email services?
[....]
>We still need to filter email, but we should be using those filtering cycles
>to enforce OUR interests on the advertisers.
[....]
>There are various anti-spam email systems out there, but so far all of the
>ones I've looked at expect me to pay blackmail "insurance" charges to get
>rid of the spam. This is a WRONG economic model, and I will NOT be
>blackmailed.

Perhaps we can start a discussion about the economic models of spam control 
and various systems possible. Below is a quote from section 1.7. of Dave 
Crocker's draft on spam control mechanims 
(http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-crocker-spam-techconsider-01.txt), 
we can start off discussion with this:

-------snip-----
Postal mail imposes a fee on the sender for each message that is sent. Such 
a fee makes the cost of sending significant, and proportional to the amount 
sent.  In contrast, current Internet mail is very nearly free to the 
sender.  Hence there is interest in exploring "sender pays" email.

One form of sender-pays is identical to postal stamping.  Another entails 
"retribution" to the sender, taking the fee for their posting only if the 
recipient indicates they were unhappy to receive it. For both models, it is 
not clear that it is possible to retroactively fit the necessary mechanisms 
to Internet mail. Its complete absence from the current service and the 
existence of anonymous and free email services may provide too much 
operational inertia.  It is also not clear who should receive the fees or 
how they should be disbursed.
-------snip-----

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yakov Shafranovich / <research@solidmatrix.com>
SolidMatrix Research, a division of SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"One who watches the wind will never sow, and one who keeps his eyes on
the clouds will never reap" (Ecclesiastes 11:4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg