Re: [mailop] Gmail blocking of good customer
On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 7:14 PM Matt Palmer via mailop wrote: > That's something to talk to your ESP about. They're in charge of retrying. Christine *is* the ESP. Kids these days. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] Junk filtering as a tool for unfair competition
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 6:22 AM Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote: > But even if one such message goes through, is this really a problem? Yes, it certainly can be. If an email causes a user to install ransomware on a corporate network, then it is an enormous and expensive problem; it's put companies out of business. If a phishing message means that an company gets infected with malware, the remediation is hugely expensive. A neighbor of mine just missed a paycheck when the small business he works for got an email giving the payroll clerk a new routing number. It looked just like the legit emails she gets from the processor, so she transferred the money to some guy in Indonesia. They filed a report with the FBI, but they won't get that money back. The level of education needed to prevent these incidents is not feasible for the casual user; I just got email from "Expedia" telling me to log in because my trip had changed, and I had to look very carefully and check headers against an email I knew to be legit to determine it was a phish, and I've been doing this for 20 years. It's really a problem. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] Best Re-engagement Email
The answers to most of these issues would be found in A/B testing. Test each element separately--queue up a list of variables, and test each in turn. IME, the answers are different for each industry/list. --Kelly On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 3:31 PM Damon via mailop wrote: > > I have asked around and got a few opposing answers. Plain text vs. HTML, > images ok/images not-ok, Opt-out Link at top or bottom, send from > transactional IP vs. customer's 'regular' IP, CTA incentive for re-engaging > included or not. > > Anyone have any really good examples of ubiquitous re-engagement email > content and/or would like to share some insight/direction? > > Regards, > Damon > ___ > 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
Re: [mailop] [ext] RE: Return Path / Sender Score
On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 6:50 AM Ralf Hildebrandt via mailop wrote: > > * Mathieu Bourdin : > > Hi again, > > > > > > > First, a precision: my reply is missing 2 lines wich, for short, > > were saying: "but usually you don't get listed on the first sending to > > a trap, > > Yes, because that would instantaneously blacklist all servers sending > double-opt-in > mails If you are a smart spamtrap operator, you would have code that recognizes a confirmation message and flags someone to look at the trap is volume gets unreasonable. > > it's more an accumulation of emails to different traps that > > get you in trouble form what I understand of how traps work". > > Hopefully. IME, if you send even a single phishing/malware email, you'll get blocked right quick. > > Second: yeah if the domain/address you are sending to was giving you > > "proof of life" (answers and so on) until very recently and is now > > being used as a trap that would be kinda rude (and not very useful to > > detect actual spammers), most trap owners I have spoken with usually > > say that they will bounce (hard) mails for at least 6 months straight > > on re-used addresses (and most say they do it for at least a year). A year is IMHO best practice. --kelly ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
