On 2022-04-16 at 23:12:19 UTC-0400 (Sun, 17 Apr 2022 05:12:19 +0200)
Paul Vixie via mailop <[email protected]>
is rumored to have said:
Bill Cole via mailop wrote on 2022-04-15 17:47:
On 2022-04-15 at 08:37:54 UTC-0400 (Fri, 15 Apr 2022 14:37:54 +0200)
Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop <[email protected]> is rumored to have said:
Dnia 14.04.2022 o godz. 12:40:52 Al Iverson via mailop pisze:
Yes, it is unfixable. Once Google's AI decides (for no apparent
reason) that it will reject e-mails from you, or put them to
recipients' spam folder, there's pretty much nothing you can do
about it.
That is false.
I can believe your claim that "that is false" if you can give me a
WORKING advice of what can I do to make my e-mails get to the
Google's inbox. Other than "change your ISP" or "change your
domain", as this is NOT A SOLUTION, as I already stated.
OK, so you know why Google rejects your mail and how you could fix
it, if you wanted to have your mail accepted instead of having a
solid point to argue here.
So the text that Al quoted is not actually true. There IS an apparent
reason and there IS something you could do about it.
srsly? do you really think changing one's domain name or ISP is a
reasonable way forward when google isn't accepting one's e-mail?
Reasonableness is case-specific Or "subjective" if you prefer...
If it is the *only* clearly working way forward, I'm not sure how that
modifies or interacts with whether it is "reasonable." If you want to do
something, you do it in a way that works, right?
and does anyone think my friends and family who use google as their
mailbox provider would be glad google had taken that approach to my
e-mail? (don't make me say "survivorship bias" please.)
I have no useful opinion on what unfamiliar-to-me 3rd parties would
think.
If you still think this is fixable, then give me a working fix.
Don't try to send mail to shabby mail operators with a domain that
they can't distinguish from similar ones that they correctly know to
be used as throwaways.
i think you could have punctuated that sentence after "operators".
It certainly would radically change the meaning from what I said...
but google is a "shabby mail operator" (your words) who has taken my
friends and family as hostages. i cannot be expected to like this, or
thank them for it, or respect them for it. "we're the phone company,
we don't care, we don't have to" hasn't gotten more appealing across
the decades.
I would never dream of expecting you or anyone else to like or respect
Google. I don't consider that a prerequisite for interop.
In the context I was replying to (Mr. Rafa's well-publicized
difficulties rooted in use of a de facto registry under a 2LD,) there
really are 2 options: use a different domain without a reputational
problem or just live with deliverability issues and hope that eventually
having recipients mark stuff as "not spam" has an effect on the holy
Algorithm.
I am NOT saying that what Google is doing is "right" in some way that
doesn't assume a Google corporate viewpoint. It's not. It's stupid
and wrong, unless one is primarily concerned with Google's short-term
financial bottom line.
i'm with you there.
But as Al said, it is simply false that they are acting at random or
that their deterministic blundering cannot be worked around.
their capricious opacity isn't helping them or us, but is hurting them
and us, and amounts to the same kind of cost-shifting that we all seem
to hate when spammers do it.
Yes. The same is true of many things we do for deliverability. We live
in the world we were all trying to prevent 20+ years ago.
"cannot be worked around" is not the standard under discussion, btw.
Context matters.
Also, I'm not sure any other standard is useful for deliverability in
2022. Are Fastmail, Protonmail, Runbox, Tucows, etc. really better than
Google, MS, or Yahoo at accepting non-spam or are they just smaller
enough that they haven't yet blocked one of the rare folk who speak up
about it where I can see it? I have no way to know. I know that the
mailbox providers I've worked with have at times rejected legitimate
mail, albeit not knowingly & persistently, because their mailbox users
are their customers. That's less true of the freemail providers who've
expanded into outsourcing corporate mail. One thing that sets the Big
Guys apart is that they all appear to be happy with not delivering
wanted mail to the INBOX if a sender doesn't meet their arbitrary
standards. I don't know how big a mailbox provider needs to be to adopt
that attitude. I'm fairly certain that no amount of outrage from
middle-aged sysadmins can move the needle on it, so I've stopped being
outraged at needing to work around the stupidity.
--
Bill Cole
[email protected] or [email protected]
(AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
Not Currently Available For Hire
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
[email protected]
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
