4 ms·

What the blogger said, 1. Whenever a message is sent to a recipient that has never received a message from that account before, modify the message to include a

What the blogger said, 1. Whenever a message is sent to a recipient that has never received a message from that account before, modify the message to include a link at the top that the recipient can click on if the message is spam. --This is probably something workable, but then it needs a certain proactive work from users which I think people who don't clear their inboxes don't do normally. 2. Limit the number of new recipients that can receive email from that account to a few dozen a day. --nope, won't work. What about jobseekers who spam employers. As much as this is spam, there are diamonds in the rough. 3. If the number of spam reports from that account exceeds a certain threshold, shut the account down. --workable. but what if the user's computer is spambotted? not everyone is an expert. probably a few days warning before a shutdown is a workable solution here. again, it'd be better if the server informs the user of spam flagging and intercept outgoing messages until they agree to a TOS. If there're still TOS violations, shut it down. 4. Require a valid credit card number to set up a new account. -- nope. privacy issues. just not worth it.

lisper 18y ago
> This is probably something workable, but then it needs a certain proactive work from users which I think people who don't clear their inboxes don't do normally. Doesn't matter. As long as a big enough percentage of the recipients participate it will work. > What about jobseekers who spam employers. As much as this is spam, there are diamonds in the rough. This is for free email accounts only. ISP's could charge a progressive schedule of fees for accounts with fewer restrictions. It would still serve to eliminate spam because spam relies on the accounts being actually free in order to be profitable. > privacy issues. just not worth it. Again, this is for free accounts only. I'm a big privacy advocate, but I think a compromise on privacy to reduce spam is a worthwhile tradeoff.

lisper 18y ago

> This is probably something workable, but then it needs a certain proactive work from users which I think people who don't clear their inboxes don't do normally. Doesn't matter. As long as a big enough percentage of the recipients participate it will work. > What about jobseekers who spam employers. As much as this is spam, there are diamonds in the rough. This is for free email accounts only. ISP's could charge a progressive schedule of fees for accounts with fewer restrictions. It would still serve to eliminate spam because spam relies on the accounts being actually free in order to be profitable. > privacy issues. just not worth it. Again, this is for free accounts only. I'm a big privacy advocate, but I think a compromise on privacy to reduce spam is a worthwhile tradeoff.