BoomerSooner
Premium
join:2004-02-11
 ·Pioneer Telephone ..
·Pioneer Internet
| What's the difference?
Playing a little devil's advocate here but ...
What's the difference between an ISP charging a company to send an advertisement/SPAM through their servers versus the postal service (or any other carrier) charging a company postage to send an ad through regular snail mail?
If an advertiser can't "afford" to pay the postage, doesn't the same "free speech" argument apply? Isn't the carrier "determining" what mail you get based on the fact that they are charging the advertiser?
/devil's advocate hat off/
--
I'll take "Things Only I Would Know" for $10,000. |
|
jpark
join:2005-02-05
Jackson, TN
| People do pay the Post Office to deliver spam snail mail to my mailbox. People also pay the Post Office to deliver non-spam snail mail. I don't pay the Post Office to deliver mail.
When I pay an email provider for email service, then that provider charges someone to deliver the service I have already paid for, that is wrong.
Suppose your church sends a newsletter out. Because it is a newsletter, it will be flagged as spam. Your church can then pay AOL/Yahoo to let their newsletter through to you. That is not likely to happen. So you can't get the newsletter you signed up for through an email account you paid for. That is just not right. Since you paid to receive it, you should not have it intercepted by your email provider. |
|
BoomerSooner
Premium
join:2004-02-11
·Pioneer Telephone ..
·Pioneer Internet
| said by jpark  : ...Suppose your church sends a newsletter out. ... /devils advocate hat back on/
So if this applied ONLY to "commercial" entities, that would be better then. If "non-profit/clubs/associations/etc etc" lists could register with those ISP's and NOT have to pay any fee, that would fly a little better then.
/devils advocate hat resting again/
--
I'll take "Things Only I Would Know" for $10,000. |
|
dannysdailys
join:2000-09-29
Lockport, NY | You guys don't seem to get it, read my note above. This puts all newsletters in the same category as spammers. |
|
DHRacer
Fire Survivor
join:2000-10-10
Lake Arrowhead, CA | reply to BoomerSooner
But like the Do-Not-Call list, or any other such list, it can be abused and bypassed.
What's to stop some jerkoff spammer from signing up under the "non-profit/clubs/associates" lists and then ruining it for everyone?
|
|
dannysdailys
join:2000-09-29
Lockport, NY | Easy, keep the White List and forget about the pay per nonsense. Do your own homework, if you want to hire a third party, fine; you pay them. Know what I mean? |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to BoomerSooner
said by BoomerSooner :Playing a little devil's advocate here but ... What's the difference between an ISP charging a company to send an advertisement/SPAM through their servers versus the postal service (or any other carrier) charging a company postage to send an ad through regular snail mail? If an advertiser can't "afford" to pay the postage, doesn't the same "free speech" argument apply? Isn't the carrier "determining" what mail you get based on the fact that they are charging the advertiser? /devil's advocate hat off/ Another thing you have to consider.
If the offer is fraudulent, the person sending the ad via postal mail can be charged with "mail fraud." Also, since this has to be paid for legitimately, they can't hide behind a zombied machine or stolen credit card.
Also, almost everyone pays to send something in the mail. You pay nothing to receive it. |
|
