Sending newsletters should cost something

I will say that Gmail seems to catch almost all of that historical sort of spam for me. But I get another 50+ emails per day (not counting those that are dumped in my spam folder--probably because enough people reported them as spam) that are various marketing because I once had a badge scanned at a show, someone bought a list of scanned badges from somewhere, I entered an email to download a doc I wanted to read, a PR pitch because I sometimes write for publications, etc.

None of this is exactly spam and I sometimes go on an unsubscribe binge (and report as spam anything without an unsubscribe) but it's still a flood of mail.

This is probably the list you remember. It got used a lot more before spam filters actually got good enough to protect most inboxes (a development that I think is way under-appreciated today). Clever people on message boards spent a lot more time trying to think up new ways to beat spam than they do now.

Edit - now with good ol' ASCI formatting.

—————————-

  Your post advocates a

  ( ) technical
  ( ) legislative
  ( ) market-based
  ( ) vigilante

  approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)

  ( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
  ( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
  ( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
  ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
  ( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
  ( ) Users of email will not put up with it
  ( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
  ( ) The police will not put up with it
  ( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
  ( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
  ( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
  ( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
  ( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business

  Specifically, your plan fails to account for

  ( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
  ( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
  ( ) Open relays in foreign countries
  ( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
  ( ) Asshats
  ( ) Jurisdictional problems
  ( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
  ( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
  ( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
  ( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
  ( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
  ( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
  ( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
  ( ) Extreme profitability of spam
  ( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
  ( ) Technically illiterate politicians
  ( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
  ( ) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
  ( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
  ( ) Outlook

  and the following philosophical objections may also apply:

  ( ) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical
  ( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
  ( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
  ( ) Blacklists suck
  ( ) Whitelists suck
  ( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
  ( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
  ( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
  ( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
  ( ) Sending email should be free
  ( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
  ( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
  ( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
  ( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
  ( ) I don't want the government reading my email
  ( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough

  Furthermore, this is what I think about you:

  ( ) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
  ( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
  ( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!

Thank you, that is it!

I believe it was HN's Paul Graham who innovated wrt spam filters.

The provider I used was onto it (I used Mutt over SSH with them and all spam was in a seperate folder due to procmail IIRC but later they added spam and virus filters which you could customize), that was before Gmail existed though. They do the same, for free, but you pay with your privacy.

95% of the mail I get goes directly into my trash. And there's no way for me to bounce mail addressed to the previous homeowner.

Legitimate emails aren't the issue here, you'll keep receiving junk from outside EU or from senders that don't comply