Talk:Cost-based anti-spam systems

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Shouldn't there be some sort of criticism of this idea (that is, if there is a source)? Sure, everybody hates spam, but why punish everyone for spammers' stupid tricks? The internet is great because there isn't a fee for e-mailing (well, there's the cost of subscribing to the internet using Comcast or some other provider), but an "e-mail stamp" is a terrible idea (at least the way I see it). I think it's great we're finally actually trying to do something about spam, but why punish everybody? If it were me advocating some sort of solution to the spamming problem, I'd....let's see, actually punish the spammers. What a novel idea. But I understand part of the problem is they are so hard to track down. However, if we refused to say "we can't track them down" like 10 or 15 years ago, the spammers wouldn't have gotten the message that they can spam all they want and never suffer the consequences. It's a mess, and so is this little post of mine, but if anybody runs across a source that criticizes this method, please add that to the article. I'll do the same if I run across something. Thanks, (talk) 00:11, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I apologize. I misread the article. I thought the entire article was about the "e-mail stamps" idea. I guess that's just a small section in the article, and technically, it has its own article. I should have read this article more carefully. Please ignore the previous post I made. My mistake. (talk) 00:15, 26 March 2011 (UTC)