On Wed, 5 Mar 2003 09:14:20 +0900
"Shannon Jacobs" <shanen(_at_)yamato(_dot_)ibm(_dot_)com> wrote:
I'm surprised to see so little focus so far on the underlying cause of the
problem. The economic model of email is fundamentally broken
Nope, that's not the cause of the problem. That's trying to impose a model
that works in a world of tangible property, onto the world of interpersonal
communication. Imposition of this model hasn't worked well in the case of
intellectural property laws, and it won't necessarily work well for
communications either. You can argue that recipients' time is a scarce
resource that should be subjected to market forces, but this relies on several
false assumptions - in particular, that there is an ordering relation for the
value of communication, and that the value of such communications is fungible
with money.
Solution? Obvious. Alternate economic model. Why not use an extended header
line for postage-paid email?
Because one of the best things about email (much of the time) is that it does
not impose significant burdens on senders.
Which is not to say that raising the burden on senders, some of the time,
under some conditions, might not be useful. But it's not *the* solution.
Keith
p.s. if you really believe that everything can be equated to money, try to set
a price for someone who wants to take up your time as you are breathing your
last...
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg