I believe that the critique portion of my website
http://home.nyc.rr.com/spamsolution/An%20Effective%20Solution%20for%20Spam.htm
now answers all of the significant issues brought up concerning my
system. If there is
an important flaw that is not addressed then I would certainly like
to know about is.
You can say that as many times as you like, but your saying it
repeatedly does not make it so. It remains the case that your
system will spam non-users who have never tried to mail users and
will effectively force graphicalization of email on everyone who
needs to correspond with users of your system. The 'critiques'
section of that page doesn't address ANY of the critiques with
anything but hand-waving and dismissal.
That said, I think it would be a positive thing for your system to
be adopted and run alongside email as an alternative messaging
system with its own clients and adopted by 80% of recreational
Internet users for their email-like messages. sending the bait
elsewhere would be a good thing to get the sharks to leave...
-- Bill Cole
I think that we are largely in agreement. I suspect that the people you
would define as "recreational" internet users represent most of the
email users in the world. Likely almost every user of AOL, Hotmail, Yahoo,
etc.,
as well as most of the people who you would stop and survey on the street
would fall into this "recreational" group of people who use email primarily to
send
baby pictures, communicate with friends and family, and conduct routine
consumer level
business transactions. This group of users may represent hundreds of millions
of people.
Most of these users would care very little about the fate of oddballs who can't
even view pictures sent via email. It would be an extraordinary accomplishment
if 80% of these users used this system to become spam free.
I suspect that many of the participants of this list use and manage email in a
way that
is very different than the way that the average Joe does. Ergo the flaws in my
system
(such as graphical support) may be absolutely intolerable to the people
involved with the
ASRG but these same flaws may be trivial to the average Joe. Eliminating spam
for most, if not all people, would be an accomplishment.
There is still some concern that the bounces will "spam" innocent people. If
we arbitrarily guess
that 1 out of 50 forged spam return addresses represents a real active account,
and if we assume that bounces will only be sent back to 5% of spams after
filtering, then we would have a 'bounce spam'
problem that is only 1/1000th the size of the spam that is being sent out.
This is not even
taking into account the ease with which a bounce can be prevented from reaching
a user if that
user had not sent out the corresponding email. I do not believe that this will
be the flaw that sinks this system.
Michael Kaplan
--
_______________________________________________
Find what you are looking for with the Lycos Yellow Pages
http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp?SRC=lycos10
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg