Gregory Nowak was quoted by Simon Hobson: > > I have toyed more than once with the question of what would happen if > > a group of us running our own mail exchanges made the choice to > > reject mail from gmail.com with a 550? If a few of us did it, we might > > miss mail we maybe wanted to get. If a bunch of us did it, then a > > bunch of gmail users would complain to google. My guess is google's > > response would be "this is a free service; if it doesn't work for you, > > then don't use it.??? > > No, I'll tell you what Google's response will be : > > "Our system is working fine, the other system is broken". > Don't forget that this is a company that is quite happy to > simply change the rules on the basis that it's big enough that > the rest of the world will adapt. Look at the history of stuff > they've "just changed" because it suits them. Sticking > with email, they were one of the first to implement SPF > fully knowing that it would break most mailing lists and > mail forwarders around the world - and so most mailing lists > around the world had to update software & change setups to suit > Google's* new set of "how email is to work" rules. I know, > I had a customer facing mail server** and mailing list server.
I am considering starting an admin list, where one can only subscribe with an address starting with admin@... and perhaps only one admin@... per IP. While I support the right of consenting adults to indulge in various risky behaviours, including bending over for surveillance capitalists, I'd like to think that a more selective list would lead to more worthwhile conversations. I am perhaps a bit unkind when I say we have reached the point where many people have been so captured by google and similar that a form of Stokholm syndrome has set in, and that useful conversation is often derailed with "but actually I like ads that are relevant to my interests", "the upgrade/feature treadmill is fun, and keeps us all safe/buying stuff" - and I regard the entire SPF/DKIM/DMARC/SRS/nonsense part of this. I remember the propaganda being that encrypted mail is too hard to implement, dear Barbie: And yet here we are - we now are supposed to have full on signatures in every mail, yet the keys aren't held by the user, and the mail isn't private, and google spams me anyway - WTF, where did we go wrong ? I suppose I am derailing things - but if you think the admin@ list is something worth doing, let me know (off list is fine too) regards marc _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng