[Gllug] Paying to send email..

[Adrian McMenamin]

On Mon, 6 February, 2006 1:27 pm, Dan Stevens (IAmAI) wrote:
>> This is all true, though I suspect that the big spammers won't bite -
>> they
>> send out millions of their emails because the marginal cost is all but
>> zero. If the marginal cost is even 0.25c then it becomes less sensible -
>> particularly given the dismal quality of most spams anyway.
>
> The whole idea is so pointless and paradoxical, it's boggling my mind!
> AOL/Yahoo claim/appear to have invented this idea because spam is a
> problem. The fact that spam is a problem demonstrates the fact that
> their spam filters are poor, and that AOL/Yahoo's spam filters are not
> hampering the effectiveness of spamming. Thus, as the spam filters are
> poor, there is no need to 'open the opportunity' to bypass the filters
> as it provides no advantage for spam; if there was need to, spam
> wouldn't be a problem because the spam filters would prevent the
> majority of spam, thus spammers would not spam or spam elsewhere.
>
Thinking about this some more - here is how they will make money.

AOL tell their users that commercial emails that are not QA'ed by their
system are likely to be bogus

BigBank finds users delete their emails

BigBank pays AOL $0.25 per email to ensure readers pay attention when they
are being warned they are at overdraft limit

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug