[ale] OT: the Penny Black anti-spam proposal

[ChangingLINKS.com]

On Friday 26 December 2003 17:58, Greg wrote:
> Since many spammers just use others pc's I don't think the $/emails would
> work.

I agree. I don't think the $ for email idea was very well thought out - 
especially from a "getting users to buy this idea" standpoint. 

Plus, aren't we all tired of new laws that hurt the victims more than the 
perpetrators (think Patriot Act et al)?

Personally, I think that the current spam blocking methods are fine. For 
example, some of my members have email accounts that make me (as a human) 
verify that I sent the email. It is not too much trouble to fill out the 
form. 
There are other solutions as well (like my personal method is just to simply 
change email addresses after my box starts to get overwhelmed by spammers 
that spider the ALE list). Others use spamassasin, etc.

I feel that the "Penny Black anti-spam/M$FT" proposal is not a good solution 
because of the weaknesses noted in the article AND the fact that a 
"spamarrest" solution is better (even though they immediately spam the sender 
after a verification, and they don't appear to be completely free).

I see people using the spamarrest type solution everyday - and I would even 
recommend a free version to those who don't receive lots of email from 
different legitimate people.
-- 
Wishing you Happiness, Joy and Laughter,
Drew Brown
http://www.ChangingLINKS.com