How an FBL is supposed to be used versus how an FBL is used is always a topic for discussion that can be applied to anything.
How many of us expect email to be delivered instantly? But where is it defined that email has to be delivered the second the sender clicks that send button? But we all get up in arms when that email doesn't arrive in 2 minutes. My take on users abusing the "this is spam" button is, if they click the button then they don't want to receive mail from that sender ever again. If 10 years later they wonder why they're not receiving mail from that sender, then maybe they should have rethought clicking that "this is spam" button from that sender. If the recipient server wants to send messages from our server into their users spam folders and report those as spam via the FBL, then obviously that provider doesn't want to receive mail from our server. If the intended recipient of that message doesn't like it, then talk to the recipient server administrator that's sending the messages into your spam folder and sending it back along the FBL and ask them why they're doing that. Maybe it's time to consider a different provider? Is all of that the intended function of the FBL? Probably not. But there's got to be some end-user education. End users are going to have to realize that clicking the "this is spam" on a message from a recipient that you clearly at one time wanted to receive messages from, doing that is going to have consequences. On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 11:58 AM Support 3Hound via mailop < mailop@mailop.org> wrote: > I agree with you Neil, > let me specify it better even if it's a bit off topic. > The FBL SHOULD NOT be used like that but this is how users act based on > the feedback we collected from end users when we tried to understand why we > was receiving so much FBL on double-optin collected lists and transactional > e-mail. > There is also a worst case: users sometime select the whole list of weekly > e-mail received in years and click "junk" in order to achieve a "delete all > + unsubscribe", often they do it when their mailbox get full it's a fast > cleanup. > So, TRUE! It's not the way it should be used but it's what the end users > is experiencing and expecting. > > Coming back in topic: > Not paying to get ARF FBL (so not unsubscribing anymore FBL) will be seen > as a bad practice? > Maybe this is the final act for the FBL service that is just mis-used and > so no-more useful also for gathering reputation data... > > > > > > Il 11/09/2023 14:05, Neil Jenkins via mailop ha scritto: > > That's a … different perspective on this behaviour. Treating an FBL report > as "unsubscribe" (or rather *proscribe* at the ESP level) is terrible for > user experience and not at all what the feedback loop should be used for > IMO. Users click Report Spam by mistake one time (this happens *a lot)* > and suddenly they don't get emails they want. Even worse, as the > proscription is often at the ESP-level, the original sender ban be unaware > of the block and thinks they are still sending correctly. These are a > nightmare for our customer support team to deal with — the sender's support > are saying they are sending the message, our support are telling the > customer there's no logs of it ever reaching our servers. The customer is > stuck in the middle > > > _______________________________________________ > mailop mailing list > mailop@mailop.org > https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop >
_______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
