Again, this remains relevant.
Your post advocates a
(x) technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based (x) vigilante
approach to fighting cybercrime. 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.)
(x) Legitimate uses would be affected
(x) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
(x) Many users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
(x) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
(x) Lack of centrally controlling authority
(x) VPNs and proxy servers
(x) Jurisdictional problems
(x) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
(x) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
(x) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
(x) Technically illiterate politicians
(x) Extreme stupidity on the part of users
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
(X) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever
been shown practical
(x) Blacklists suck
(x) Whitelists suck
(x) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
(x) Why should we have to trust you?
(x) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(x) 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
Okay, I had to extend "spam" to "cybercrime" but the underlying message is the same.