Michael,
Our FBL system for mailbox providers, including OpenSRS, takes complaint
feeds in one side and matches/relays to authenticated sender
subscribers such as yourself. We do see instances of users at various
mailbox providers cleaning out old inboxes en masse via a spam button
versus a
It appears that Brian Sullivan via mailop said:
>engagement rates to fall back to previously lower levels. All mail routed to
>the inbox before this transitional period, and all has routed to
>Gmail's spam folder since high volume batch mailings resumed despite
>super-tight audience engagement
*nods*
I'm sending from a single IP. It's just a low-volume server. Maybe 10 - 20
messages a day?
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
Midwest Internet Exchange
The Brothers WISP
- Original Message -
From: "Jarland Donnell via mailop"
To: mailop@mailop.org
When I cut my sending infrastructure back from a /22 to a /24, I noticed
reputation improvements pretty well across the board. That mainly being
because with a /22, no single IP sent enough email to be noteworthy.
This is fairly recent for me, and seems to be based on the same theory.
On
Poking around their support pages, portals, etc. doesn't give me what I'm
looking for, so I thought I would ask.
Have Google and Microsoft done anything to resolve their inability for
low-volume senders to get out of the blocklists?
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
Hi Michael,
A message is considered spam only if its receiver declares it has such (even if
he asked to receive it in the first place).
The Validity Universal Feedback Loop doesn't filter any spam report, it returns
messages marked spam to their original senders, mainly based on IP.
In that
Hi mailop community,
I work in deliverability for a prominent ESP and am struggling with terminally
bad Gmail IP & domain reputation, along with almost 100% spam placement for a
particular sender going back many months.
My most recent submission to Gmail's bulk sender support portal:
