[Mailman-Users] The economics of spam
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
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