TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:RE: The odds of finding work through job ads From:MList -at- chrysalis-its -dot- com To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Tue, 18 Mar 2003 16:46:01 -0500
> Meanwhile, the technology used to block spam consumes more and more
> resources, raises the cost of the internet to everyone, and can cause
> legitimate email to break in the process.
To me, this sort of thing argues more and more strongly for a new
e-mail protocol; one that allows/requires the sender's provider to
charge for each message sent.
Those who wanted to reduce/eliminate the amount of spam that they
receive would opt in, and anybody who wanted to receive from
them would need to have opted in.
People would change over by using the existing SMTP system to
spread the word about their new status. They could maintain both
kinds of mail until the old-style became generally passé.
One possible arrangement for the payments would be some sort
of clearing-house arrangement, or (gawd, I hate to advocate a
bureaucracy...) a sort of eskrow with verified refunding.
That is, you (the ISP) would collect from your clients and
pay into a pool/fund. At the end of the month, you'd receive
a refund from the backbone uber agency, based on valid messages
sent from your domain(s). If one of your users had dared to spam,
the recipients would have one central place to complain, and the
agency would withhold repayment, based on the number of bad
messages that you'd allowed to get through. There'd be some
overhead charge, for the service.
As an ISP, you could charge what the market would bear, in your
area, per message. Charging not enough would mean a loss that
you'd have to make up elsewhere. Charging too much would mean
that customers would begin looking elsewhere.
In the new protocol, relaying would be closed by default, so
you'd need to explicitly choose to open for such business,
and to take on the potential costs involved.
Sure it needs work. But I think that something like that is
coming.
Gee! Should we get together and assemble an RFC? :-)
/kevin
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Order RoboHelp X3 and receive a $100 mail-in rebate, plus FREE
RoboScreenCapture, WebHelp Merge Module and iMarkupSoftware, for a total
giveaway value of $473! Order here: http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l
Help celebrate TECHWR-L's 10th Anniversary starting this month!
Check out the contests at http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/special/contests/
Happy birthday to you, happy birthday to you, happy birthday TECHWR-L....
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
