Here's what I sent the author:
Hello, I am pleased to see an article listing arguments
against sender-pays systems.
Here are some hopefully cogent answers to your objections:
1: I do not consider it a problem when my e-mail receiving
server in Kansas City refuses
to accept messages from strangers in Belarus who don't know
me well enough to include a "magic phrase" with their
2: Micropayments are only a problem due to fear, uncertainty,
doubt and greed on the part of established payment system players.
The tipjar.com micropayment infrastructure has been happily
processing payments of single pennies since 1996. No, it hasn't
made any money, but if it ever reaches its break-even point it
3: You seem to think that a sender-pays system would have
to be a mandated top-down system that would replace all
current systems in a momentous, sparky revolution. The
pay2send infrastructure plays nicely with current e-mail
protocols, blocking postage-due messages with language
that current e-mail systems understand. When a service
provider joins the pay2send sender-pays infrastructure,
that service provider's customers can then have their
micropayment bill included with their regular monthly
bill, much the way that a long distance bill is included
with the monthly bill for a telephone land-line.
Thank you very much again for the thoughtful article. Would
you accept a position on the pay2send technical advisory board?
david nicol / get a spamless forwarding address at http://www.pay2send.com
Asrg mailing list