On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 11:25:39AM +0000, Laura Atkins wrote: > > > On 12 Feb 2020, at 11:15, Johann Klasek via mailop <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 10:03:52AM +0000, Laura Atkins via mailop wrote: > >>> On 11 Feb 2020, at 17:01, Scott Mutter via mailop <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > > [..] > >>> Your statement is certainly valid, and I don't mean to sound whiny. But > >>> it is also frustrating when providers (usually large providers, like > >>> AT&T) appear to block an IP for... no apparent reason. The IP is clean > >>> on all blacklists and SenderScore is 99. If there were other factors in > >>> play I'd be more apt to understand and investigate who is sending out > >>> spam on this server. But it's just AT&T blocking it. > >> > >> > >> Public blacklists and senderscore are an incredibly limited and, in my > >> experience, pretty useless way to determine your mail is fine. I???ve had > >> hundreds of sales inquiries over the years from folks who admit to me they > >> are spamming. Yet, they will have Senderscores >90 and no public > >> blocklists. > >> > >> Lack of negative data does not indicate good behavior. > > > > Right, but the way around, for bad behavior one should have and provide > > data to prove it. > > > Why?
I would regard it as simply unfair to block purely arbitrary, without any reason ... If one has the attitude to block then they have to provide mechanisms to handle disputes on this which really works. _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list [email protected] https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
