3 ms·

Maybe some strategies from other industries could work here. Such as a “bonded trust” system. So a new email provider could use real money as a proxy for trus

Maybe some strategies from other industries could work here. Such as a “bonded trust” system. So a new email provider could use real money as a proxy for trustworthiness, since they obviously don’t have a solid history to rely on. For example, the major providers could demand depositing $1 USD per email/per day they want to send out in exchange for the spam filtering to be turned off for their domain. That is if they wish to send out 1k emails/day to Gmail addresses and make sure they land in the inbox, they deposit $1k USD with Google. The catch being that if more then 5% of the emails (or whatever the ideal percentage is) are marked spam, then their bonded money is taken away. And they’ll have to put up a new bond. That way new entrants can get a foothold without having to jump through so many hoops.

knallfrosch 4y ago
I don't think emails are worth this much. As others have posted, users will spam-report even emails that they intentionally signed up for.
- 93po 4y ago
  99% of the emails i've received from companies that aren't strictly transactional are not ones that i opted in for, and no, burying it in the terms and conditions isn't "signing up for it". you can hardly blame the users here
  - slyall 4y ago
    You don't understand. People will mark anything as spam. Those "Strictly transactional" emails, some people will mark them as Spam. Does this email Spark Joy? No. Mark as Spam
    - dragonwriter 4y ago
      That's actually pretty much original definition of spam email: the narrower definitions were an attempt by industry and government to operationalize subsets of the problem that could be regulated or systematically addressed.
    - geraldhh 4y ago
      not even counting all the instances where transactional notifications are marked as spam by heuristic, the message silently rotting away in a junk folder and contributing to a bad rep of the sender, simply because no one bothered to un-spam-mark it.
- MichaelZuo 4y ago
  Then smaller email providers will have to be very picky about who they onboard. And/or the senders of such emails will have to be careful that every email is legitimately and actively desired by the recipients. Or there is no viable business here and we go without the extra emails, a not too bad tradeoff.

knallfrosch 4y ago

I don't think emails are worth this much. As others have posted, users will spam-report even emails that they intentionally signed up for.

93po 4y ago
99% of the emails i've received from companies that aren't strictly transactional are not ones that i opted in for, and no, burying it in the terms and conditions isn't "signing up for it". you can hardly blame the users here
- slyall 4y ago
  You don't understand. People will mark anything as spam. Those "Strictly transactional" emails, some people will mark them as Spam. Does this email Spark Joy? No. Mark as Spam
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    That's actually pretty much original definition of spam email: the narrower definitions were an attempt by industry and government to operationalize subsets of the problem that could be regulated or systematically addressed.
  - geraldhh 4y ago
    not even counting all the instances where transactional notifications are marked as spam by heuristic, the message silently rotting away in a junk folder and contributing to a bad rep of the sender, simply because no one bothered to un-spam-mark it.
MichaelZuo 4y ago
Then smaller email providers will have to be very picky about who they onboard. And/or the senders of such emails will have to be careful that every email is legitimately and actively desired by the recipients. Or there is no viable business here and we go without the extra emails, a not too bad tradeoff.