On Wed, 2018-03-07 at 12:31 +0000, Benjamin BILLON wrote:
> Good point.
> However, things change, and this norm should evolve with the involved
> technologies; also, maybe this data quality process, if abusing third-
> parties resources (like RCPT TO: for nothing), is not an acceptable
I agree and I don't actually think attempting delivery is necessary for
data quality purposes. Being able to go beyond basic typos and look at the
structure of the address is usually enough and some of those service do a
fine job of that.
In fact, I'd go as far to say many such organisations are probably only
using validation services because of the lack of depth with validator
classes in the public domain. If someone was to offer a validation service
that didn't poke SMTP servers I'd say that would work in most cases.
> Offline acquisition of online-related data (an email address, for
> instance) definitely is odd by definition. I don't know, just from the
> top of my head, print a QR code printed on the paper so users could
> register online, from their smartphone.
I don't think it's really an engineering problem. There are always going to
be times where an email address is given or updated offline. Paper forms
are one example but there are others; think of people who need to interact
with government services but don't have a fixed address and access their
email from Internet cafes. There are many scenarios when email is a wanted
means of communication but it is not possible to confirm in real-time.
> Also, if I'm not mistaking, list-validation services are mainly targeting
> online businesses, so even if the there might be legit cases, I doubt the
> biggest part of their revenues is.
I'm not really familiar with their revenue model but I do know that for
some of them, spammers and rogue marketers absolutely do not make up the
majority of their client base, if at all.
Ken O'Driscoll / We Monitor Email
t: +353 1 254 9400 | w: www.wemonitoremail.com
Need to understand deliverability? Now there's a book:
mailop mailing list