A Trial Balloon to Ban Email?

[bear]

On Mon, 12 May 2003, Matt Crawford wrote:

>This doesn't fit Joe Lunchbox's current model in which he dumps his
>outgoing mail onto his provider's server and turns off his machine.
>His provider either has to deliver synchronously and bounce the
>computational payment burden back to Joe, pay it for him, or bounce
>the message.  In the latter case, the receiver who demanded cycles
>needs to recognize the problem it set and accept the answer on a
>later date.

I submit that if Joe Lunchbox is not spamming, he is unlikely to
need to change his habits regarding having his machine available
for a computational burden.  The mail he sends to people known to
him will not ordinarily trip spamfilters at the recieving end that
would make such requests.

Likewise, all the people who use remailers to send anonymously.  As
long as what they're sending isn't identifiable as spam, the remailer
won't get a CPU-time request.

				Bear