On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 7:07 AM, Josh Smift <[email protected]> wrote: > DC> Personally, I detest messages which claim to come from somebody I know > DC> but examination of the headers reveals they actually came from such a > DC> marketing company. Even if the message was authorized, I object to the > DC> practice as fraudulent. > > AC> The reality is the exact opposite. It's best practice to use outside > AC> services or separate servers for mass mail, you don't want your > AC> corporate email server's reputation being tarnished by mass mail. > > That doesn't sound like the opposite to me: If you're using an outside > service to send mass mail, precisely so that it doesn't tarnish your > reputation, isn't that in some sense fraudulent? You want to send the > mail, but you want to obfuscate the fact that you're sending it. > > Maybe that isn't what Dave Close meant, though.
I don't think its fraudulent to send my email through my own server, my rented server, or any third party. Corporate or mass email. As long as I'm identifying the messages (From header, content, etc) I can't image how they'd be considered so. As for reputation, with a large enough mail out, there are enough false positives which will cause issues. There are a small amount of people who report the mail as spam no matter what; we sent out a customer their invoice the other week which they marked as spam... There are crappy blacklist. There are all kinds of valid reasons. As well the large providers all work together - if they get 1000 messages from some random IP, they might just drop it compared to coming from google or amazon. _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
