Re: [Shutup] [ietf-smtp] Well Known Bad Anti-spam Idea

Re: [Shutup] [ietf-smtp] Well Known Bad Anti-spam Idea - paid network

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Thu, 03 December 2015 19:13 UTC

Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2015 19:12:59 -0000
Message-ID: <20151203191259.36292.qmail@ary.lan>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf-smtp@ietf.org, shutup@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <56605758.8090107@dcrocker.net>
Organization:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/shutup/dTaVkW8KeQ3tqO5wqMJdFW8Zm6E>
Subject: Re: [Shutup] [ietf-smtp] Well Known Bad Anti-spam Idea - paid network
Precedence: list

>On 12/3/2015 5:44 AM, Jacob Palme wrote:
>> I think that the only workable method of getting rid of spam is to charge the sender of messages a price of perhaps 0.10
>$/recipient for sending messages.

>There are many approaches to solving spam that will work quite
>effectively, if only they were able to work at all.
>
>Your view is one of many that is oft-repeated, very appealing, and
>entirely unworkable in the current real-world.
>
>As such proposals always warrant, please carefully review Cory
>Doctorow's famous checklist:
>
>     http://craphound.com/spamsolutions.txt

For more details, see this white paper I wrote.

It's ten years old but nothing of importance has changed other than
that you might add the occasional extra zero to orders of magnitude.

http://www.taugh.com/epostage.pdf

R's,
John

Re: [Shutup] [ietf-smtp] Well Known Bad Anti-spam… John Levine