I agree that this demonstrates that the 'charge per email' schemes that people
have don't work.
Some users seem always find a way to do harm with innocent things (a sort of a
normal distribution, I guess). In the case of postal mail at least the post
office
has collected money. By the same token for a provider any paid e-mail including
spam
is a source of revenue.
--- "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker(_at_)verisign(_dot_)com> wrote:
From: Jeffrey Hutzelman [mailto:jhutz(_at_)cmu(_dot_)edu]
As is my usual practice, I asked the post office to hold my
mail while I was away at IETF 67 (this is a standard service
offered by the US Postal Service at no charge). I took some
time off after, so when I finally picked up my mail, it was
about 3 weeks worth. I received a plastic shopping bag full
of mail, and after I sorted through it, I had several bills
and a grand total of three other pieces, all of which were
prearranged (an issue of QST, a newsletter, and an
invitation). The rest of the bag was spam.
I agree that this demonstrates that the 'charge per email' schemes that people
have don't work.
But if postal mail recipients could impose filters they would.
And there is in point of fact an entire police force tracking down scam
artists
using the postal mail.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
____________________________________________________________________________________
Want to start your own business?
Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/r-index
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf