Marc Perkel wrote:
> I see no reason that everything has to be free. Ultimately we all have
> to eat and we do something to make a living.
>
> There are people in the world who are both ethical and financially
> successful. So if someone is doing something right and making a buck
> at it I don't have a problem with that.

I agree 100%. But that is not really the issue here. The issue has more
to do with how to set up those business models such that good behavior
on the part of the whitelist maintainer is 'incentivized' and bad
behavior by the whitelist maintainer is 'disincentivized'. Therefore,
generally speaking, it is at least very difficult for any whitelist
which involves payment-then-removal to be a highly ethical operation,
imo. Not saying it can't be done, but this is not normally how
pay-for-removal works out.

Return Path's certification program is probably one of the best examples
of this working out, but that is mostly because (a) Return Path has
sufficient # of high-end and ethical customers such that they are
'incentivized' to dump any low-quality customer that comes along so as
to not sully their reputation with their high profile customers, and (b)
Return Path's whitelist is more valuable if used by more spam
filters--and they lose THAT market share if they allow mainsleaze
spammers on their whitelist. These two things provide incentives for
Return Path to run an ethical list.

Obviously, Return Path and emailreg.org have very different business
models, but I haven't heard very much similar reasoning for how/why
emailreg.org is also properly 'incentivized' for good behavior other
than "trust us", "$20 isn't much money", "we promise, we remove
spammers", and they do have some good hoops that prospective customers
must jump through (proper rDNS, etc).

But, as I said, I highly trust my well-placed contact who vouches for
emailreg.org, so I'm satisfied.

My main point--yes, having revenue is NOT a bad thing--but that doesn't
mean that certain business models for various whitelist/blacklists don't
sometimes 'incentivized' bad behavior--and when it LOOKS like it is
happening, I think the anti-spam community SHOULD ask questions!

-- 
Rob McEwen
http://dnsbl.invaluement.com/
r...@invaluement.com
+1 (478) 475-9032


Reply via email to