Re: SPAM-less email (was If anybody wants to make something in Ada but

["AG" <ang@xtra.co.nz>]

"Robert A Duff" <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote in message
news:wcche8wpz6x.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com...

> > We need to think about the _larger_ picture here. Too many people
> > are stuck in the "let's filter" thinking, which is only a half
> > measure. I'd like to challenge everyone to look to at a solicited
> > email only solution. This is the _only_ way to eliminate unwanted
> > mail (proof witheld ;-)
>
> But I *want* unsolicited email in some cases

Well, if you do that's fine.

> , like when somebody sends,
> "Hey, you've never heard of me, but I heard your company (SofCheck,
> Inc.) make static analysis tools, which I might want to buy.  Please
> tell me more."

If you expect that sort of mail in a free-for-all mailbox
you would probably have some people sifting through
all the junk coming into it - even after any reasonable
filters killed half of it (and paying the costs of course).

> I don't want to pester such a person with extra hassles
> involving encryption, or transactions of $0.02 and refunds thereof.

However, suppose I want to have a mailbox which
is freely visible and accessible. I might actually buy
something that's advertised on that unsolicited mail.

But: let's say any mail to that mailbox is automatically
charged that $0.02 after 48 hours unless I cancel
that in the meantime. (Any e-mail that can't be traced
or charged is automatically rejected). Now, that would
allow two things: Any person/company/organization
that has a legitimate reason to use it need not worry -
no charge happens. Any would-be seller is free to try
it (at $0.02 it's not a big deal if you really hope for
a sale and it may even be refunded if the sale works).

However, in the case of mass-mailer spam that would
quickly become prohibitive: If you can't be charged
you don't get to post. If you can, then, say, a million
posts to such addresses would mean $20,000
investment up front with little chance of recovery ...