That's just too fun not to add:
https://github.com/mxroute/rspamd_rules/commit/9a697ba947c9a1ad4a9a543fa2984fcd0e9ecd4f
Always glad to reject a few more emails from spamgrid.
On 2021-09-11 22:23, John R Levine via mailop wrote:
Today's phish, sent directly from sendgrid to my father who has
Wow. I’m used to weird text from some source being copied and pasted, and I’m
used to obvious phishing language, but I think this is the first time I’ve seen
both in one email. It’s very jarring.
> On Sep 11, 2021, at 8:23 PM, John R Levine via mailop
> wrote:
>
> Today's phish, sent
In article <1967837452.10796.1608741683...@appsuite-gw2.open-xchange.com> you
write:
>> ESPs are well within their rights to refuse to do business with some
>> customers.
>>
>I am pretty sure that if an ESP refused to do business with any customer from
>a specific ethnic group, or
On 12/22/20 12:34, John Levine via mailop wrote:
In article you write:
The only basis on which these emails should be judged is on whether
they're spam or malware.
This suggests you're OK with child pornography and beheading videos so
long as subscribers ask for them. And what about the
> Il 23/12/2020 13:13 Laura Atkins via mailop ha
> scritto:
>
>
> The discussion is simpler than that. Sendgrid owns their network.
> Sendgrid gets to make the rules about what is allowed on their network.
>
> Spam isn’t illegal, yet they prohibit it.
>
> Gambling related
Dnia 23.12.2020 o godz. 12:13:25 Laura Atkins via mailop pisze:
>
> Spam isn’t illegal, yet they prohibit it.
There are at least few countries where spam *is* illegal.
> Gambling related email isn’t illegal, yet many ESPs prohibit it.
In many countries gambling operators (casinos etc.) need
> Il 22/12/2020 21:56 Mark E. Jeftovic via mailop ha
> scritto:
>
>
> There are clear, existing, unambiguous laws against this, and nobody
> questions any entity who not only declines to facilitate this but actively
> purges it from their platforms.
>
> Where I have a problem
Am 22.12.20 um 02:56 schrieb Eric Tykwinski via mailop:
> Seriously, this is probably political… Not saying I agree, but unless it’s
> spam, i.e. unwanted by your recipients,
> then you just have a bunch of wack jobs as clients and keep it at that.
As John has stated in his original mail, it
On 23/12/20 6:24 am, Mark Fletcher via mailop wrote:
On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 9:53 PM Rob McEwen via mailop
mailto:mailop@mailop.org>> wrote:
The moment "spam" gets away from "consent" and goes into "content"
(specifically *legal* content) - there are enormous problems -
because
On 2020-12-22 3:34 PM, John Levine via mailop wrote:
> In article you write:
>> The only basis on which these emails should be judged is on whether
>> they're spam or malware.
> This suggests you're OK with child pornography and beheading videos so
> long as subscribers ask for them. And what
In article you write:
>
>The only basis on which these emails should be judged is on whether
>they're spam or malware.
This suggests you're OK with child pornography and beheading videos so
long as subscribers ask for them. And what about the Malware of the
Day club?
As someone else already
The only basis on which these emails should be judged is on whether
they're spam or malware.
It is always within the purview of private companies to put whatever
parameters they want around who they do business with. Sometimes the
risk/reward incentives just aren't there. But being an internet
On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 9:53 PM Rob McEwen via mailop
wrote:
>
> The moment "spam" gets away from "consent" and goes into "content"
> (specifically *legal* content) - there are enormous problems - because
> it then becomes one person's often very subjective opinion - against
> another'
Dnia 22.12.2020 o godz. 00:39:47 Rob McEwen via mailop pisze:
> and the same article FB was using (actually, a few different
> articles did this) said that Remdesivir was our BEST med for
> fighting COVID, yet the WHO recently recommended against use of
> Remdesivir due to the WHO *now* claiming
On 12/21/2020 9:55 PM, John Levine via mailop wrote:
when antivax nonsense persuades people who would otherwise get
vaccinated that they shouldn't, they or people they infect may die.
The politest term I have for Sendgrid's actions here is deeply irresponsible.
The moment "spam" gets away
On 2020-12-21 22:15, Jay Hennigan via mailop wrote:
On 12/21/20 18:55, John Levine via mailop wrote:
The politest term I have for Sendgrid's actions here is deeply
irresponsible.
Agreed, but not solely because of the content of the message. It, like
much of what comes from Sendgrid, is
On 12/21/20 18:55, John Levine via mailop wrote:
Also, while the Skokie march was phenomenally offensive, at that time
there was no issue of physical harm or injury from the march. But now,
when antivax nonsense persuades people who would otherwise get
vaccinated that they shouldn't, they or
In article <6dd6bf78-40da-4b88-afff-2150598f0...@truenet.com> you write:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>Seriously, this is probably political… Not saying I agree, but unless it’s
>spam, i.e. unwanted by your
>recipients, then you just have a bunch of wack jobs as clients and keep it at
>that.
>If
Seriously, this is probably political… Not saying I agree, but unless it’s
spam, i.e. unwanted by your recipients, then you just have a bunch of wack jobs
as clients and keep it at that.
If it helps ease your conscience, think of it this way:
On 12/21/20 17:21, John Levine via mailop wrote:
Now they're sending antivax spam from the pseudoscientific Weston A. Price
foundation.
As long as the checks don't bounce, I don't think Sendgrid really cares
if the mail does.
--
Jay Hennigan - j...@west.net
Network Engineering - CCIE #7880
20 matches
Mail list logo
