(sorry for the previous empty message) On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 at 20:50, Michael Rathbun <m...@honet.com> wrote: > On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 10:13:35 -0600, Paul Kincaid-Smith <p...@emailgrades.com> > wrote: > >(I'm probably measuring read rates differently than you. I use IMAP's > >"message read" flag, not an open tracking pixel or click-tracking link.) > > I confess that I am not at all sure what you are doing, as we would normally > not have IMAP access to a recipient's mailbox.
Same doubts here. > Based on the usual crude tracking pixel and click-tracking links, we often see > open rates at hotmail/msn/etc at under half those seen elsewhere. Same here. Based on the tracking pixel hotmail is less than half compared to gmail (gmail has the higher rates on our "sample"). > [...] > 2. Given the great desirability of completely eliminating the filter process, > devise as many ways as possible to populate each recipient's safe and banned > lists, regardless whether they would like you to do that. This would explain why "red" IPs (SNDS) can still show very high open rates and looks like mostly unrelated to engagement rates. "red" is computed on a shared filter.. but the shared filter is ignored by the recipients that are "used to read" the emails. So you still do your "open rate" simply because people that opened some times in past had an "autocreated whitelist for the sender" and they keep receiving that stuff in inbox because of their local whitelist even if the IP start getting RED. Maybe, or maybe not. Stefano _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
