From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 1997 00:41:12 -0800 (PST)
To: snow <pete@ubisg.com>
Subject: Re: Excerpt on SPAM from Edupage, 11 February 1997
Message-ID: <199702150841.AAA07716@toad.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 02:05 AM 2/14/97 -0600, snow wrote:
>Pete:
>> 	Yes, but why does monetary compensation make it then O.K.?  I'd rather
>> pay for my Internet access, then be bombarded by spam, no matter what
>> they paid me!  I think the best soln. is the one that is currently in
>> place for phone calls - they can call once, but if I tell them not to
>> call me again and they do, I can then begin legal action against them. 
>> I pay more per month for my phone service than my Internet service (
>> although in NY, *everything* is more expensive. ), and junk phone calls
>> are way more intrusive then spam.
>
>	I figure if this scheme comes to fruition, I'll just set up a seperate
>account (or procmail) to filter out the spam, deposit the coin, and go on
>about my business.


That's fine...that's EXACTLY the way the system would work!  Intentionally 
so!  The purpose of the payment is not because the sender feels some sort of 
legal obligation to pay; rather it's analogous to a tip to a waiter.

The sender makes the payment based on however much he _wants_ you to pay 
attention to his message, but fully aware that there is no guarantee that 
you'll do so.  

Jim Bell
jimbell@pacifier.com