Hi, Just to clarify, Mailchimp does remove addresses from specific lists when we receive a hard bounce. Atro is correct; we do not suppress hard bounced addresses globally across all of our users for a number of reasons. Each user's list is self contained in that respect.
In the past, allowing each user to bounce an address independently has caused some receivers to believe that we are not responding to hard bounces at all. That's not true, but I definitely understand where the perception is coming from. Of course, there is always a remote possibility that some misconfiguration on our side is causing us to reclassify your specific bounce message. You can compare our *X-MC-User* header to verify that we are not suppressing the address at the user level. If you think this might be the case, feel free to reach out to me off-list, and we'll troubleshoot the issue. Then again, if you are looking for global suppression, you can reach out to our abuse team to see if that can be arranged. Cool, Matthew delivery.mailchimp.com On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 11:13 AM Luke via mailop <mailop@mailop.org> wrote: > I cant tell if this the thing about ESPs not removing bounces is a joke or > not. All of the major ESPs have logic for adding bad addresses to > suppression lists. Of course their users can choose to unsuppress, but ESPs > certainly remove bounces. Seems like most people here should know this. > Maybe I'm missing something about your comment? > > On Wed, Jun 3, 2020, 11:30 PM Atro Tossavainen via mailop < > mailop@mailop.org> wrote: > >> > For me, it was noticing how, despite getting 550'd for an extended >> period of >> > time, Mailchimp just keeps hammering away at the address, never >> dropping it >> > from the list. That, too, is not the behaviour of a responsible ESP. >> >> As I keep saying, we would not have a business at all if any ESPs actually >> removed bounces. So thank you to everyone who doesn't. If there are >> entities that do, I don't know which ones they are. :-D >> >> Way back when, some people who are also on this list kept complaining >> that simply keeping domains registered without an A and MX (causing >> NXDOMAIN for mail delivery) is not a proper bounce, because you (as the >> sending entity) are somehow not able to trust the results your own >> servers produce, but have to get third party validation for the fact >> that an address doesn't exist (which I think is totally bass-ackwards), >> but anyway, we started 550 5.1.1'ing addresses during the timeout period >> of new domains we acquire, and still, no change. >> >> There is also the issue that anything that Operator X finds out while >> processing data for Customer X1 cannot apply to Customer X2 because >> anything to the contrary makes Operator X a DATA CONTROLLER in their >> own right from the perspective of the GDPR and what did I say about >> that just a few messages ago? >> >> -- >> Atro Tossavainen, Founder, Partner >> Koli-Lõks OÜ (reg. no. 12815457, VAT ID EE101811635) >> Tallinn, Estonia >> tel. +372-5883-4269, http://www.koliloks.eu/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mailop mailing list >> mailop@mailop.org >> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop >> > _______________________________________________ > mailop mailing list > mailop@mailop.org > https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop >
_______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
