Subject: Re: [Asrg] Proposal: Separate ISP(s) for "guaranteed delivery" of email

From: Kee Hinckley <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 12:57:22 -0400

At 2:20 AM -0400 6/30/03, Walter Dnes wrote:
>model.  Too expensive for everyday use for every piece of mail, but the
>right solution when the sender is willing to pay a bit of money to
>ensure that a file gets delivered.

But in the case of you sending a purchase question to a five 
companies, it's the *company* that cares most about getting the 
message delivered.  You don't care much if one doesn't make it.  They 
do.
-- 
Kee Hinckley
http://www.messagefire.com/          Anti-Spam Service for your POP Account
http://commons.somewhere.com/buzz/   Writings on Technology and Society

I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept
responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate
everyone else's.

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg

---

From: Walter Dnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 16:57:15 -0400

On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 12:57:22PM -0400, Kee Hinckley wrote
> message delivered.  You don't care much if one doesn't make it.  They 

  How much do they care; 75 cents' worth ?  It's their decision, just
like with snail-mail versus courirer.

-- 
Walter Dnes <[email-masked]>
Email users are divided into two classes;
1) Those who have effective spam-blocking
2) Those who wish they did

---

From: Kee Hinckley <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 18:07:20 -0400

>like with snail-mail versus courirer.

No.  That's a sender decision.  I'm talking about a receiver 
decision.  And the problem is that if the receiver starts paying for 
receipt of messages (e.g. to their sales line) then they are open to 
a different kind of for-profit spam.
-- 
Kee Hinckley
http://www.messagefire.com/          Anti-Spam Service for your POP Account
http://commons.somewhere.com/buzz/   Writings on Technology and Society

---

From: Walter Dnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 11:07:51 -0400

On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 06:07:20PM -0400, Kee Hinckley wrote

> a different kind of for-profit spam.

  Please re-read my original proposal.  It includes the sentence...

> The general public could join with free "read-only" accounts, with
> the option of sending one-off messages for a low fee.

  Most customers of UPS/Fedex/Purolator are businesses, and have
accounts with them.  But individuals do use couriers occasionally when
the need arises, and pay a one-off fee.  The "Business ISP" is to be
a "sender-pays" system.  The sender *ALWAYS* pays for messages sent.
The receiver *NEVER* pays for messages recieved.

---

From: Kee Hinckley <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 11:26:21 -0400

>The receiver *NEVER* pays for messages recieved.

One of us is misunderstanding.  I'm not sure which of us.
My issue as a business is how do I ensure that I reliably get email 
from customers who aren't paying to send.
-- 
Kee Hinckley
http://www.messagefire.com/          Anti-Spam Service for your POP Account
http://commons.somewhere.com/buzz/   Writings on Technology and Society

---

From: Yakov Shafranovich <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:33:47 -0400

At 11:26 AM 7/4/2003 -0400, Kee Hinckley wrote:

>My issue as a business is how do I ensure that I reliably get email from 
>customers who aren't paying to send.

Perhaps some kind of a COD mechanism?

---

From: Walter Dnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 00:54:14 -0400

On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 11:26:21AM -0400, Kee Hinckley wrote

> from customers who aren't paying to send.

  Given that...
  a) $9/month or freebie email accounts are, by definition, not
     business-class robust
  b) turning off filtering to guarantee reciept of customer email means
     a deluge of spam

  I would suggest web-forms for customer contact.

---

From: "C. Wegrzyn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2003 07:48:54 -0400

I assume when you say: reliable you mean you will always get it if one 
is sent. Unfortunately there is no way in the SMTP world to do that.

Chuck Wegrzyn

---

From: Kee Hinckley <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 12:08:06 -0400

>   I would suggest web-forms for customer contact.

As a customer, I despise them.  So as a vendor I'm not likely to want 
to rely on them.

Why don't I like them?

- inability to contact multiple vendors in one message
- no record of the message I sent in my outbox
- unable to use them offline
- no easy way to keep vendor contact information in my address book
- repeated information I have to enter every time I converse with the vendor

They put all the convenience on the vendor, and none with the customer.
-- 
Kee Hinckley
http://www.messagefire.com/          Anti-Spam Service for your POP Account
http://commons.somewhere.com/buzz/   Writings on Technology and Society

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 08:23:31 -0700 (PDT)

Most contact webforms in reality send email to one or more persons at the 
company anyway. The question is that companies do not want to provide 
their email addresses on website (harvesting and other reasons) and trust
what has come from their website rather from direct email. 

So the problem is in trying to extend trust that vendor see from their 
webform to email sender. One such mechanism is to have vendors display to 
the users on website email addresses such as "[email-masked]" 
where xxxxxx corresponds to sessionid of the visitor to their website and 
exist for certain small period of time. Because session ids can be unique 
and with 8 hex characters there can be more then enough of them to not be 
repeated for a long time while the actual email (for example
"[email-masked]") is not too long to not allow user to write 
it down or copy it over to the mail client software. Relaying on session 
ids will also allow to trace those who harvest and immediatly send spam
as you can then look at the logs and see what ip address was responsible.

---

From: "C. Wegrzyn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2003 14:08:10 -0400

But this doesn't provide any kind of guaranteed delivery. Once you 
inject email into the equation all bets are off.

Chuck Wegrzyn