Re: Yahoo and AOL Plan Would Charge Senders a Fee to Route E-Mail _
Around Spam Filters_
Philippe Verdy (n.o-s.p.a.m+abuse)
verdy_p at wanadoo.fr
Thu Feb 9 06:44:11 EST 2006
"Possum Trot" <PossumTrot at dont.spam.me> a écrit dans le message de news:
ds83gm$anm$1 at news.spamcop.net...
> 1/4 to 1 cent? How about making that in dollars or Euros.
Or 0.0025 EUR to 0.01 EUR What does it change?
May be Yahoo and AOL could do the reverse: with your personal account, you
have a limited weekly book of stamps. For sending more emails from the Yahoo
account, you need to buy stamps online. To be allowed to send emails inany
case, you must be authenticated.
For almost all home usersthat send emails manually, they will have much
enough stamps to use the service freely and reasonably. Above this
threshold, users will need to go elsewhere (using aliases could be easily
defeated by tracking the source IP of the sender, or by the confirmation
email that is needed to verify the identity ofthe sender), or the emails
would remain in the outgoing box. Users could still manage which email they
feel is more urgent.
Yahoo and AOL email creations would be also limited in time from the same IP
or same alternate email address, with supplementary accounts being left on
At start, you would have fewer stamps, but the number of free stamps per
week could increase with time with the number of past emails that were not
rejected, and decreased with the rejected emails, or if a mailbox stays too
long with too many received mails in the box. This would give bonus and more
freedom for legitimate users, would reduce the load of their service, and
mailboxes could then become larger.
This would push out spammers currently using Yahoo or AOL to send email, so
less spam originating from their network: there's a limit to the offered
free service. And other ISPs would be much more happy (and easier to block
with less collateral damages if they accept spammers in their system).
Currently, the need to use filterscreatestoo many false positives and harms
more the users of large ISPs justbecause they can host much more spammers
and they canrelay their spew muchfaster before dectection and ousting, when
the small ISPs or independant organizations can more easily tweak their
filters and surveillance for the needs of their users.
Another good thing is that this would greatly reduce the impact done by a
single subscriber infected by a viral spamware: their email stamps would be
exhausted immediately, theiroutgoing mailbox would be full of proofs of
spam, and these users would need to take action to clean their PC, possibly
using free cleaning tools provided by the ISP's assistance.
More information about the SpamCop-List