On Fri, 29 Jul 2022, Justin Scott via mailop wrote:
Interestingly any email "operator" with fewer than 500 employees or less
than $5 billion in annual revenue is exempt, so clearly targeted at the
major providers and not self-hosted operators or small hosting companies,
thankfully.
Yes, but
On Sat, 30 Jul 2022 18:44:10 +, "Larry M. Smith via mailop"
wrote:
>.. I really don't know, but I tend to discount the belief that this is a
>conspiracy against them.
Looking over the past seven years' data, I find that exactly one Democrat
campaign purchased an address that delivers here.
I think in this case we all know what they're doing and you've hit it
dead on. They're targeting Gmail and they're not really interested in
anyone else.
On 2022-07-30 11:16, Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote:
I'm not an American, so it's basically "not my fairy-tale" (as we say
in our
country),
On 7/29/2022, Anne Mitchell via mailop wrote:
I want to be sure that everyone here is aware of a piece of pending legislation
in the U.S. that is in committee in both the House and the Senate right now.
It's called the Political BIAS Emails Act of 2022 (BIAS is short for “Bias In
Algorithm
I'm not an American, so it's basically "not my fairy-tale" (as we say in our
country), but I can't stop wondering at the use of the word "label" in the
proposed regulation.
I already asked (in a bit sarcastic tone) in one of the previous emails, what
is a "label" in context of email in general.
Some questions and thoughts on HR 8160 and SB 4409 and the CAN-SPAM Act...
Are operators covered by HR 8160 and SB 4409 still allowed to block emails that
do not comply with the CAN-SPAM Act?
Of the 7 requirements in the FTC's CAN-SPAM Act compliance guide
Is there any hard data? This seems like thesis bait. I'd expect there to be
a steady trickle of papers or reports with good data on political spam. Where
are they?
I hear lots of complaints by conservatives/Republicans that the spam filters
are biased against them. If they send more spam,
