At 1:38 PM 11/15/1996, Adam Back wrote:
Peter Hendrickson <ph@netcom.com> writes:
However, if you restrict postings to an approved group of people, perhaps everybody on the mailing list, you can eliminate spam. How, then, do we allow anonymous postings to come through? Individual people on the list can receive the proposed post and forward it to the list if it is appropriate. They could even charge a fee for doing it. That's easy to do if there is a "paying" remailer which will handle the money for them.
Not necessarily a good idea. The post may be a hot potatoe, and the forwarder may find themselves in legal trouble. (Say RC4 & RC2 source code, NSA handbook, the results of the Mykotronic's dumpster diving spree, etc). Exercising `editorial control' has landed some ISPs in trouble, to the extent that some are specifically avoiding it for that legal reason alone. Being _paid_ for forwarding the message may make that even worse.
Often the posts which would get the anonymous poster (or the true name forwarder) into the most troublle, are the ones which are most interesting, and also very on topic.
(In case you get this out of order, this is my second response.) Another way to have anonymous posting but not be subjected to spam and the like is to dispense tokens every week to the subscribers. They can be signed blindly so that anonymity is preserved, just like e-cash. Peter Hendrickson ph@netcom.com