On Sun, 23 Mar 2003, Thomas Shaddack wrote:
On Sat, 22 Mar 2003, J.A. Terranson wrote:
To date, my personal pet has been payment in computationally intensive
solutions to questions posed by the recipient. This forced expenditure of
effort, even if minor, removes the spammer's incentive
On Fri, 21 Mar 2003, Steve Schear wrote:
I guess you have unlimited time and consider your time worthless. Its not
That doesn't follow at all. I consider my limited time very valuble.
I simply believe creating an artificial scarcity at the infrastructure
level a bad way to address spam.
On Fri, 21 Mar 2003, James A. Donald wrote:
The intention is sender pays, recipient is paid, reflecting the
real scarcity of readers time. Mailing lists would be sent
Which in the real world will never happen. Sender-pays, if deployed,
will end up being something like MS's Penny Black,
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 14:18:10 -0500
From: Jamie Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Steve Schear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: CDR: Re: Spammers Would Be Made To Pay Under IBM Research
Proposal
Mail-Followup-To: Steve Schear [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED
At 07:10 PM 3/22/2003 -0800, Tim May wrote:
On Saturday, March 22, 2003, at 03:49 PM, Steve Schear wrote:
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 14:18:10 -0500
From: Jamie Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Steve Schear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: CDR: Re: Spammers Would Be Made To Pay
--
The intention is sender pays, recipient is paid, reflecting
the real scarcity of readers time. Mailing lists would be
sent out without postage, but with cryptographic signature,
and subscribers would have to OK it. Letters to the list
would be accompanied by payment, which
On Saturday, March 22, 2003, at 03:49 PM, Steve Schear wrote:
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 14:18:10 -0500
From: Jamie Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Steve Schear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: CDR: Re: Spammers Would Be Made To Pay Under IBM
Research Proposal
Mail-Followup
On Fri, 21 Mar 2003, James A. Donald wrote:
The intention is sender pays, recipient is paid, reflecting the
real scarcity of readers time. Mailing lists would be sent
Which in the real world will never happen. Sender-pays, if deployed,
will end up being something like MS's Penny Black,
The intention is sender pays, recipient is paid, reflecting the
real scarcity of readers time. Mailing lists would be sent
out without postage, but with cryptographic signature, and
subscribers would have to OK it. Letters to the list would be
accompanied by payment, which would be
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 14:18:10 -0500
From: Jamie Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Steve Schear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: CDR: Re: Spammers Would Be Made To Pay Under IBM Research
Proposal
Mail-Followup-To: Steve Schear [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED
On Saturday, March 22, 2003, at 03:49 PM, Steve Schear wrote:
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 14:18:10 -0500
From: Jamie Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Steve Schear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: CDR: Re: Spammers Would Be Made To Pay Under IBM
Research Proposal
Mail-Followup
--
On 21 Mar 2003 at 23:01, Jamie Lawrence wrote:
We all want to get rid of spam. I think most folks on this
list are in favor of using market dynamics to influence
behaviour. I think adding an artificial fee to sending email
is stupid. It is creating false scarcity to fix a broken
12 matches
Mail list logo
