On 17 Oct 2017, at 15:42, David Jones wrote:
How did Mailchimp respond to your abuse report? If they quickly
handled it, then I see no need to remove them from the local
whitelist. They have a serious interest to keep their reputation
intact so they should handle this rogue customer of theirs quickly.
IMHO, there is more benefit from the whitelist entry versus all of the
FPs you will get with it removed. I wouldn't say this for all senders
but there are a few major senders like Mailchimp, Sendgrid,
Constantcontact, Mailgun, etc. that I would leave in since they
quickly handle abuse reports.
That's highly site-specific, even user-specific. I would never whitelist
any of those, since I have direct personal experience with each of them
blatantly (and in some cases even explicitly) NOT acting on clear,
polite, properly-targeted, unredacted spam reports of their customers
hitting "spamtraps" that could not appear legitimately on any mailing
list. One compliance manager in that set (who is happy to no longer be
in that role) told me directly in 2015 that large enough customers were
effectively immune to spam reports because of the way their metrics were
structured. In that particular case the address being hit repeatedly
despite complaints was one that could only have been obtained by
acquiring one of my employer's customers' (or co-workers') address
books.
With that said, I also have never been in an employer or customer
environment where I believed any of those needed to be treated with
greater suspicion than a random unknown sender. None of them would get
mail through to an untagged address on my personal system, but that's an
outlier environment.
--
Bill Cole
b...@scconsult.com or billc...@apache.org
(AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
Currently Seeking Paying Work: https://linkedin.com/in/billcole
