The author has some oversimplifications which would be worth addressing. First, there actually does exist a strata of spam which is plainly illegal. All the ph

The author has some oversimplifications which would be worth addressing. First, there actually does exist a strata of spam which is plainly illegal. All the phishing spam and all the messages that claim to be from networks and/or addresses that they are not, for example, are illegal. The problem is that it's not enforceable. Second, sending unsolicited messages when you do not have the permission of the sender is unambiguously wrong. Large sources of spam get around this by mixing bad messages in with good ones. This is why we get tons and tons of spam from Gmail, from Outlook.com, from Sendgrid, and so on, even though they really should know better. The point is that your "bad neighborhood" doesn't just have regular spammers - it's almost certain there are illegal and egregious spammers that your ISP is doing nothing about. How do we know this to be the case? Because many of the blocklists also run honeypot email addresses. If email addresses get harvested and someone sends spam to these addresses, you can be 100% certain that no permission was ever given, so the behavior that leads to this is definitely wrong. ISPs make too much money to punish anyone but the worst of their clients, and that's definitely a factor that contributes to the affordability of the author's ISP. However, the author left out one big, simple, obvious option: pay significantly less money than the cost of the blocklist extortion to smarthost through an ISP that has good email reputation. You get what you pay for, so when you save on your ISP, don't be surprised if you have to pay a little more to make up for their shortcomings.