Hello,
sorry if i ask something that's has already asked like a zillion times
before.
I've setup a new mail server a month ago with an IPv4 that was already
on Microsoft blacklist. Plus, i did a few mistakes and i tried to send
some emails not properly configured with my domain.
I've setup
On Thu, 4 Feb 2021, Luke via mailop wrote:
Preventing outbound spam on a large system is a far greater challenge than
stopping inbound spam. The technical challenges are similar, but the
logistical challenges of preventing outbound spam without pissing off
customers is *far* greater than the cha
On Thu, 2021-02-04 at 19:23 -0800, Brandon Long via mailop wrote:
> If you received say... a million ab...@gmail.com emails a day, how
> would you handle that?
>
Pay more and more people to do it, until the number of unhandled abuse
reports at the end of the day is zero. It scales linearly. If th
Brandon Long said:
> If you received say... a million ab...@gmail.com emails a day, how would you
> handle that?
What fraction is actually spam?
What fraction is useful?
What happened to ARF? Was it useful? Does anybody use it? (When I looked at
it, many years ago, it didn't seem to fit wh
On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 4:38 AM Michael Orlitzky via mailop <
mailop@mailop.org> wrote:
>
> Pay more and more people to do it, until the number of unhandled abuse
> reports at the end of the day is zero. It scales linearly.
>
So you would gladly pay thousands of people to deal with abuse reports
w
On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 7:58 PM Brandon Long via mailop
wrote:
>
> We can always do better. When people start to complain, it probably means
> we're missing something new or have let the low level things grow too much.
> Thanks.
>
I really admire you. That you took that time to explain the actua
Not an easy to determine what is a justified abuse report and what is not...
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 4:38 AM Michael Orlitzky via mailop <
> mailop@mailop.org> wrote:
>
>> Pay more and more people to do it, until the number of unhandled abuse
>> reports at the end of the day is zero. It scales li
On Fri, 2021-02-05 at 07:26 -0800, Marcel Becker via mailop wrote:
>
> So you would gladly pay thousands of people to deal with abuse
> reports
> which are, well, not actually abuse reports. And a lot of them. I
> wouldn't.
> For the sake of the sanity of those people alone.
>
Abuse reports for
I just looked at the dns entries for foddi.net. The A and records
for mx1.mail.foddi.net has a TTL of 120 seconds. For many mail providers
that indicates a dynamic IP address. It's been my experience that 12
hrs is minimum(some prefer 24 hrs) TTL's on these records.
Lyle Giese
LCR Compu
Inspired by the two exchanges quoted below:
GMail (and presumably other ESPs wit web frontends and mail apps)
has a "report spam" button for human's to ...
report individual messages as spam, which I belive is fed back into
the spam-classifier.
Would it be useful to include a link in each emai
On Fri, 5 Feb 2021, Camille - Clean Mailbox via mailop wrote:
Not an easy to determine what is a justified abuse report and what is not...
On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 4:38 AM Michael Orlitzky via mailop <
mailop@mailop.org> wrote:
Pay more and more people to do it, until the number of unhandled a
On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 08:07 Michael Orlitzky via mailop
wrote:
>
> Abuse reports for non-abuse also scale linearly.
No.
> I don't see ignoring spam to decrease expenses
>
I see you actually didn’t read Brandon’s mail.
___
mailop mailing list
mailo
On 2021-02-04 19:04, Graeme Fowler via mailop wrote:
On 4 Feb 2021, at 15:26, Benoît Panizzon via mailop
wrote:
But I also think EXIM is screwing up the order of the received
messages
in pipelining mode.
There is a bug introduced in Exim 4.94 when using pipelining and some
recipients are de
Ok thanks, I didn't know that. I'm gonna correct it right now.
cheers
Ale
Il 05/02/21 17:04, Lyle Giese via mailop ha scritto:
I just looked at the dns entries for foddi.net. The A and records
for mx1.mail.foddi.net has a TTL of 120 seconds. For many mail
providers that indicates a dynam
On Fri, 2021-02-05 at 08:32 -0800, Marcel Becker via mailop wrote:
>
> > I don't see ignoring spam to decrease expenses
> >
>
> I see you actually didn’t read Brandon’s mail.
>
On the contrary. Each starts from the position of having gotten rich
giving guns to children, and proceeds to discuss
Hello,
On 05.02.21 17:23, Andrew C Aitchison via mailop wrote:
> Would it be useful to include a link in each email header, similar to
> List-Unsubscribe: and relatives, but unique to each message sent,
> so that recipients could give similar feedback to the sending service ?
You can not trust us
On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 9:18 AM Thomas Walter via mailop
wrote:
>
> You can not trust users to identify spam.
>
This. A Thousand times this. A lot of us privileged with the insight into
how mail technically works (or so) have difficulties grasping how real
people use mail. And the available abuse
On 5 Feb 2021, at 7:25, Michael Orlitzky via mailop wrote:
> Pay more and more people to do it, until the number of unhandled abuse
> reports at the end of the day is zero. It scales linearly.
Here's where I stopped reading. It does not scale linearly.
-lem
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 9:18 AM Thomas Walter via mailop
> wrote:
>
> You can not trust users to identify spam.
Sure you can. You can trust them to identify what *they* consider to be spam.
It just doesn't jive with what we consider to be spam.
That is, always has been, and always will b
Also, a trusted user can be hacked and his account hijacked to send spam.
> Le 5 févr. 2021 à 18:25, Marcel Becker via mailop a écrit
> :
>
>
>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 9:18 AM Thomas Walter via mailop
>> wrote:
>
>>
>> You can not trust users to identify spam.
>
> This. A Thousand times
On 2/5/21 09:41, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. via mailop wrote:
On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 9:18 AM Thomas Walter via mailop
wrote:
You can not trust users to identify spam.
Sure you can. You can trust them to identify what *they* consider to be spam.
It just doesn't jive with what we consider to be
On Fri, 5 Feb 2021, Jay Hennigan via mailop wrote:
On 2/5/21 09:41, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. via mailop wrote:
On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 9:18 AM Thomas Walter via mailop
wrote:
You can not trust users to identify spam.
Sure you can. You can trust them to identify what *they* consider to be
sp
On 2/5/21 1:44 PM, Jay Hennigan via mailop wrote:
I blame the big webmail providers for this. The "Delete" and "Junk"
buttons are too similar in the UI. Simply changing "Junk" to "Report as
spam" would help a lot.
I don't think the label will make much difference.
Changing the effort involved
On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 12:58 Jay Hennigan via mailop
wrote:
> Simply changing "Junk" to "Report as
> spam" would help a lot.
Unfortunately no, it would not.
- Marcel
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
On Fri, 5 Feb 2021, Grant Taylor via mailop wrote:
On 2/5/21 1:44 PM, Jay Hennigan via mailop wrote:
I blame the big webmail providers for this. The "Delete" and "Junk" buttons
are too similar in the UI. Simply changing "Junk" to "Report as spam" would
help a lot.
I don't think the label wil
Dnia 5.02.2021 o godz. 15:03:01 Grant Taylor via mailop pisze:
> Changing the effort involved /might/ make a difference. E.g. have
> delete be a one click action and report be a two click action vi a
> confirmation (blocking modal) dialog box.
>
> Aside: The confirmation dialog box might also p
Although I'm not terribly qualified to comment on Gmail's policies or
design decisions, I thought I'd throw in an anecdote about the "Report
Spam" user experience:
A random guy I talked to in a bar (it was a work trip, he asked why I was
in town, etc) told me that he used the "Report Phishing" func
I did talk to an individual some years back – yes, at a bar, believe it or not
– who sincerely believed that the “junk” folder was a place where he could
archive all his email that he wanted to keep but didn’t want to clutter his
inbox.
From: mailop on behalf of Zack Aab via mailop
Date: Sat
28 matches
Mail list logo
