Ok, I'm dense. How do I meaningfully consent to
somebody for which I have no a priori information
about their consentworthiness?
PV> you can't. that's why you're getting spammed.
What makes this such an "interesting" problem is the critical need for
spontaneous (unsolicited and uncoordinated) communication is many
human activities. Eliminating the ability to have new people show up
without an "appointment" will cripple some activities.
as i've said twice before on this thread in the past several days, i don't
care who you are but i do care who you know. if the world has its hooks
into you -- mutual trust, bond, or some combination -- then i will probably
consent to communication with you even if you remain anonymous behind some
kind of trust brokerage in finland. however, if you are completely rogue,
i will probably not give my consent to communicate with you.
note that that's just me. others are likely to have longer or shorter lists
of demands. some will only accept mail from folks within their own church
or political party or sexual orientation. some will continue to accept
everything. the point is, we all need to know what's being offered BEFORE
we've expended our resources to receive it.
unsolicited, uncoordinated communication is wonderful, and i miss it. let's
build a universal electronic trust hairball so that we can get it back again.
right now my choice is "deal with yahoo's endless unconfirmed spew" or "not
be able to join any of the mailing lists my neighbors have set up there" and
i would like a finer grained selection than that.