Hello Slavko,
>
> Do you really think, that email operators have nothing better to work as
> contact every one, who decide to use their service for own business? And
> for any new domain do that again and again? Adding to local BL is much
> more simple, provides the same results and -- can be automated.
>
Certainly - whichever is easier for you. I thought that in case of us managed
the "do not verify" list - there would be no traffic flying; thus it would have
a much lower footprint.
And on top of that, you would not have to invest your time into configuring
your BL, but of course, sometimes it's easier to manage BL than send an email.
>
> I hope, that soon or latter here will be DNSRBL with those "services", IMO
> Spamhaus SBL starts with something similar recently (while not exactly
> washers, it is good start).
>
I'm afraid it won't be a solution to the problem :(
Probably mostly small naive and transparent email verifiers (like us) would be
included on this list - those that are easy to catch. As we use only one domain
( bouncer.cloud ( http://bouncer.cloud/ ) ; yes we are right now removing other
old ones, that not really operational) - it will be indeed super easy to add us
on the DNSRBL.
But our 10x bigger competitors will be just rotating cheap domains and will
survive anyway.
I think that destroying all email verifiers is not going to be the solution to
the problem.
I think that:
- when spam filters block based on bounce rates,
- decent senders should have to have ways of verifying email addresses.
Among our customers, we have for example:
- governmental institutions of Ghana - every adult joining workforce of Ghana
register their email address in the governmental system, which in order to
improve data quality - uses Bouncer, at the moment of entry,
- big humanitarian organizations that have dirty databases of their supporters
(as captured in various error-prone situations),
- governments and parliaments of European countries.
We have not been reaching out to them, we did no advertisements - they found us
(and it was not easy task, cause we suck at SEO), cause they had problems.
Email community while fighting spam is also affecting decent senders, who have
no choice but to seek some solution.
I believe the change is needed, and I'm afraid that destroying email verifiers
will not solve the problem - it will just create a void, with the risk that an
even worse solution will be created by some "innovative entrepreneurs".
Exactly as it happened with VRFY decommissioning… it just created a void… and I
think that none of our predecessors, had in mind helping spammers.
I myself from time to time am contemplating what could be done to improve the
situation holistically - but I'm not as skilled and experienced in email as you
all are - have been in this "business only 5 years".
I've been thinking about incorporating blockchain technology and maybe smart
contracts to make sure that the sender has the right to send to the recipient.
But designing such a model would be super complex, cause it would have to be
equal, and not available to the privileged.
It's very complex… and I guess over my capabilities. But maybe some of you, or
you together will figure out some real solution to the problem.
And maybe we could, instead of putting our time, energy and talent in fighting
email verifiers, put it into creating new quality, that will solve the problem.
Kind Regards
Radek
____________________________________ ______ ___ ___ ___
*Radoslaw Kaczynski*
CEO of Bouncer
usebouncer.com ( https://www.usebouncer.com/ )
ul. Cypriana Kamila Norwida 24/1
50-374 Wrocław, Poland
💙 Become Bouncer’s Ambassador (
https://bouncer.partnerstack.com/?group=ambassadors )
On Wed, Sep 07, 2022 at 10:13:28, Slavko < mailop@mailop.org > wrote:
>
>
>
> Dňa 7. 9. o 9:44 Radek Kaczynski (Radek from Bouncer) via mailop
> napísal(a):
>
>
>>
>>
>> Here I meant - if you as Mail Operator, do not want Bouncer to verify
>> email addresses hosted by you - please let me know and we will put a rule
>> in our configuration.
>>
>>
>
>
>
> Do you really think, that email operators have nothing better to work as
> contact every one, who decide to use their service for own business? And
> for any new domain do that again and again? Adding to local BL is much
> more simple, provides the same results and -- can be automated.
>
>
>
> I hope, that soon or latter here will be DNSRBL with those "services", IMO
> Spamhaus SBL starts with something similar recently (while not exactly
> washers, it is good start).
>
>
>
> regards
>
>
>
> --
> Slavko
> _______________________________________________
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@ mailop. org ( mailop@mailop.org )
> https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
