[Mailman-Users] The economics of spam

Bernie Cosell bernie at fantasyfarm.com
Wed Dec 24 18:37:48 CET 2008

On 24 Dec 2008 at 11:11, Lindsay Haisley wrote:

> Charging (someone) per email, while it's an attractive concept, seems to
> be kind of a technological mismatch.  There are paradigms that can be
> associated with hard-copy paper mail that just don't apply to email.
> For instance, how do you deal appropriately with DSNs in such a system?
> How about mail addressed to "postmaster" which, by RFC, must be
> supported.

I'm not sure these are fatal-flaw problems -- the hard-copy paper mail 
world *does* have sort-of equivalent processes.  I don't understand 
exactly the problem with DSNs -- as I understand it, they are under the 
control of the sender and so the sender should pay [same as with the 
USPS: if you send stuff on the cheap, if it can't be delivered it is 
thrown away; if you pay more, they'll send you back an NDR.  Why can't 
something similar fit into a server-to-server clearing?  As for mail to 
postmaster, it must be supported but why must it be free?  USmail to 
postmaster requires a stamp...

> ... Email has evolved more along the lines of the TCP/IP packet
> paradigm rather than that associated with postal hard-copy snail-mail.
> There are aspects of email that resemble ICMP packets far more than they
> resemble Christmas cards.

Actually, this is backwards.  email *started* that way [remember that 
forwarding was provided for and there was even that cute explicit-routing 
form of email address] and has, IMO, evolved off into needing to be 
*more*like* Christmas cards.


Bernie Cosell                     Fantasy Farm Fibers
mailto:bernie at fantasyfarm.com     Pearisburg, VA
    -->  Too many people, too few sheep  <--       

More information about the Mailman-Users mailing list