You appear to be assuming that the same bad actors who are spamming
today will be the ones who are spamming tomorrow. I am assuming that
there is a much larger set of people/companies who would like to spam,
but aren't doing much spamming now because under the current set of
conditions so much spam is trashy. Those people want to "raise the
bar" to discourage the current spammers in order to make it more
acceptable for them to spam. These people don't believe the products
they want to sell you are trashy, and they don't believe they have
anything to hide. But they still want to fill up your inbox with
messages that will get in the way of communications you want to
participate in. Some of them even believe that they have a right to
fill up your inbox with such messages.
And I have the right to put them on my blacklist and tell all
my friends. And I don't even need to guess where they are
since they'll be using a name binding rather than hiding behind
a zombie army.
Really, you said that it would make things *worse*. I must have
missed the quod erat demonstrandum.
There will be too many of them for a personal blacklist (or opt-out) to
be an effective countermeasure, and some of them (not all) will
frequently adopt new identities. Shared blacklists won't work because a
significant fraction of the mail that they send will be seen as
legitimate by their recipients.
A sufficiently large number of 'legitimate' advertisers can fill up your
mailbox even more effectively than a small number of 'rogue'
advertisers, even if most of the 'legitimate' advertisers make a
reasonable effort to send the mail only to those they think want to
receive it.
Keith
_______________________________________________
ietf-dkim mailing list
ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
http://mipassoc.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim