AOL wants to tax us for sending email to you.

Post by **STrRedWolf** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 2:06 pm

That's the shortest title I can give, but it's not the full details.

AOL origionally followed a "reward for good behavior" policy of spam email -- if you're not spam, and your system followed several guidelines, email went through. Unfortunately, AOL defined what "good behavior" is, and CG occassonally found that what AOL's servers practiced wasn't was AOL's Postmaster site said they were to be.

Now, AOL's going to switch to a "pay for garunteed delivery" policy. The price hasn't been reported, but the policy itself is very much prone to abuse given how much spammers seem to scam out people (for example, an Olympic medalist funds his training by spreading spam, spyware, and adware).

I'm not fond of that myself. In my opinion, such a policy will not only degrade CG's service (if CG can even get AOL to take it's forum and account mail in the first place), in order to overcome AOL's shortfalls CG will have to pony up an unknown chunk of change. This flys in the face of the Internet's known open-network nature for legitamate traffic.

AOL has tried to shoot back, but is taking the same tactic as UU.NET when proof was stacking up against UU.NET turning a blind eye to spammers on it's dial-up network: Personal attacks on those who criticise AOL, and belittlement of the groups they represent. Those groups include MoveOn, CraigsList, EFF, the AFL-CIO, Gun Owners of America, and the Democratic National Party. In essence, AOL's pissing everyone off, and the tactic only makes AOL look worse.

If you are in agreement of this, MoveOn has started up a site called Dear AOL, where you can sign an open letter to AOL. http://www.dearaol.com is where you can read more on this.

<HR>I will make one note to this: The New York Times is reporting that Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, is introducing legistlation to ban any content tiering. Weither if this is a good bill, has a chance of passing Congress and our nutty President, and the bill can apply to email, is stuff that we have to see.

Spriteville, USA · Post by **Spriteville, USA** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 2:24 pm

Man AOL is really intent on killing itself off. Most online sites will refuse to pay (which is the sane thing to do) they will just tell users to stop using AOL as their mail account and to choose an alternative, and thus AOL loses out.

Worst idea ever.

Ahaugen · Post by **Ahaugen** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 2:48 pm

i was shocked to find out that my aunt and uncle in St Louis were still using AOL and that was back in 2002. if high speed internet is avalable in rural montana, AOL is obsolete

Christwriter · Post by **Christwriter** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 3:20 pm

This is why I think the best use of AOL CDs is coasters.

I get better service than that from Hotmail, and that's totally free. I get MSN's spam (which is amazingly easy to delete, like every other kind of unwanted e-mail) but everything else has so-far gotten caught by the junkmail filter.

And you know, I promise you the only people who WILL pay the fees will be spammers. Legitimate businesses will be able to work around it with their customers (Gmail or hotmail, anyone?) and totally ignore AOL completely. But the spammers only have to pay a small fee AND WILL BE ABLE TO GAURENTEE that their victem will get their spam.

AOL has just handed it's customers to spammers on a silver platter, complete with a sprig of parsley.

CW

Ahaugen · Post by **Ahaugen** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 3:25 pm

there's an old axom than compares self regulation to "letting the fox guard the hen house". i think we can agree that what's happening now is comparable to granting a country with ties to terrorism the contract to secure our nation's ports ... wait a minute!

here's a pretty good article on whole plan and its effect on normal people
http://www.democraticunderground.com/ar ... phere.html

Joel Fagin · Post by **Joel Fagin** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 4:06 pm

christwriter wrote:AOL has just handed it's customers to spammers on a silver platter, complete with a sprig of parsley.

As I understand it, an extremely small percentage of people fall for spam so in order to make a proft, they have to email to a lot of people. If it costs even a cent it's no longer cost effective.

- Joel Fagin

Terotrous · Post by **Terotrous** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 4:07 pm

If they charge you, just adopt a "we don't send to AOL accounts" policy. Pretty soon, every other site is gonna start doing that too, and AOL emails will be worth less than geocities accounts.

And really, someone who isn't willing to go through 10 seconds to sign up for MSN doesn't deserve a forum account here, so I wouldn't worry too much about inconviencing people.

Komiyan · Post by **Komiyan** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 4:07 pm

Ach. It's called Goodmail, and it's nothing at all to be bothered about. You can use it, or you can not. The non-Goodmail messages will hardly lose any meaning. Just ignore it, problem solved.

Spriteville, USA · Post by **Spriteville, USA** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 4:23 pm

Joel Fagin wrote:
christwriter wrote:AOL has just handed it's customers to spammers on a silver platter, complete with a sprig of parsley.
As I understand it, an extremely small percentage of people fall for spam so in order to make a proft, they have to email to a lot of people. If it costs even a cent it's no longer cost effective.

- Joel Fagin

I doubt it's the same thing but I get spam in the regular mail and that costs 39 cents to send. Depending on how they work it one cent per e-mail might be fine.

Ian Moulding · Post by **Ian Moulding** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 7:03 pm

This is a perfect example of a company 'solving' an overhyped problem that someone else solved long ago.

I have a free Yahoo account and get hardly any spam through that (Except for one company which seems to be using old servers from the dotcom days. I recognize a lot of the addresses from the Yet Another Dotcom Vanishes In A Puff Of Lies headlines of the era). I have an account from my cable provider, and get absolutely zero spam through them. Spam filters work, and most people keep tighter control over their personal e-mail addresses than they used to.

AOL caters to people who don't understand how the internet works and are a little bit afraid of it. Now AOL is promising to protect those customers from the bad people, and hopes the customers don't notice that their friends, families, and business contacts are being charged to contact them.

Also

Christwriter wrote:And you know, I promise you the only people who WILL pay the fees will be spammers. Legitimate businesses will be able to work around it with their customers (Gmail or hotmail, anyone?) and totally ignore AOL completely. But the spammers only have to pay a small fee AND WILL BE ABLE TO GAURENTEE that their victem will get their spam.

AOL has just handed it's customers to spammers on a silver platter, complete with a sprig of parsley.

And the spammers won't lose any money paying those fees, because they'll pay with cloned credit card numbers. Add in the fact that AOL has basically told its customers "Hey, these guys are okay", and I bet the spammers will get a few more hits than they usually would.

Ian Moulding · Post by **Ian Moulding** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 8:24 pm

Joel Fagin wrote:As I understand it, an extremely small percentage of people fall for spam so in order to make a proft, they have to email to a lot of people. If it costs even a cent it's no longer cost effective.

Or you just need one rich senile old man.

Compugasm · Post by **Compugasm** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 9:35 pm

I'm not signing that petition. I'm skeptical that it's as bad as you think. Lots of people pay to use email. Hotmail and Yahoo ... there is no shortage of places you can get free email from. I don't see why this is such a big deal.

The real crime, is paying to use AOL in the first place. With all the concerns about censorship lately, no-one has mentioned the bullshit games AOL plays with it's members.

Blackaby · Post by **Blackaby** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 7:06 am

Well this is a pocket full of CRRAAAAZZZZY

Rkolter · Post by **Rkolter** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:06 am

The problem I see with AOL doing this is that it's a clear conflict of interest.

Customers on AOL get spam protection. They are told by AOL that their email accounts will be safe from most spam.

Clients who purchase the guaranteed delivery plan will without question get their email into AOL accounts. I see that email looking like this:

Code: Select all

Dear sir,

We are a salvage and diving operation certified by AOL, who has in turn guaranteed that our mail will be delivered to you.  We are not spam.

We have found that you have an inheritance of $10,000,000 dollars - it was in gold bullion and sent in 1927 via the steamship Albatross, which sunk in a gale in November of that same year.

For a mere $50,000 dollars, we will begin salvage operations...

Dr Legostar · Post by **Dr Legostar** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 9:38 am

people still have AOL?

Black Sparrow · Post by **Black Sparrow** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 9:44 am

legostargalactica wrote:people still have AOL?

My Grandma does, because that's what my parents were paying for when we got my grandmother her internet connection.

Hear that, AOL? You're taxing the life insurance away from widowed old ladies! *Shakes fist*

War · Post by **War** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 9:54 am

Email needs major overhauling. It'd be so much easier if it was set up as default block and the only email you receive were from addresses on your ok list (much like how instant messaging works).

Dr Legostar · Post by **Dr Legostar** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 1:04 pm

War wrote:Email needs major overhauling. It'd be so much easier if it was set up as default block and the only email you receive were from addresses on your ok list (much like how instant messaging works).

but what if new people needed to get in contact with you?

Faceless · Post by **Faceless** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 1:06 pm

legostargalactica wrote:
War wrote:Email needs major overhauling. It'd be so much easier if it was set up as default block and the only email you receive were from addresses on your ok list (much like how instant messaging works).
but what if new people needed to get in contact with you?

Like with the instant messaging systems, request to be added to his/her list.

Dr Legostar · Post by **Dr Legostar** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 1:10 pm

Faceless wrote:
legostargalactica wrote:
War wrote:Email needs major overhauling. It'd be so much easier if it was set up as default block and the only email you receive were from addresses on your ok list (much like how instant messaging works).
but what if new people needed to get in contact with you?
Like with the instant messaging systems, request to be added to his/her list.

hmm... now that seems downright logical... we can't have that, now can we?