I'm just changing the subject line because I find the previous subject line to be extremely offensive and out of line. ----------------------------- As long as we have some spam filters which block some legitimate confirmed opt-in senders (and/or legit organizations sending to their unquestionable members), then that makes Return Path's business model legitimate and helpful.
If anyone believes that Return Path's execution of this business model ends up giving some spammers a "pass", then they should "shame" Return Path by pointing out the most egregious examples that come along. But it is understandable that a few undesirable situations are going to happen every once in a while, no matter how good and ethical a job is done by Return Path. So an egregious example that comes up every once in a while is understandable. (just like it is understandable for a legit hoster to unknowingly and occasionally sign up a spammer who deceived the hoster--happens all the time!) As long as Return Path reacts appropriately to such spammers, and as long as they are not a constant revolving door for many spammers (or anything close to that), then I don't see any problems here. I do understand the argument that their business model might provide incentives for them to be unethical in the short run just to drum up extra sales, but this is balanced by the longer-term damage this does to their reputation. Amazingly, I deal with black- or "dark gray"-hat ESPs blacklistings on invaluement.com where the ESP is run by 20-something-year-old punk kids who don't understand the long-term negative repurcussions of their business practices and seem to think that they can spam with impunity as long as they are CAN-SPAM compliant. But, in contrast, Return Path is run by rational and mature adults who "get it", imo. For the reasons stated, I reject the ridiculous argument that their business plan makes them unethical. But I do believe that it is helpful if/when the anti-spam community points out their most questionable clients, if/when deemed appropriate. That will only help inspire them to further tighten their standards and keep them accountable. (actually, I do NOT personally see any current deficiencies with them--but I'm just saying that this is a productive way of dealing with any problems anyone has with Return Path that will have a tangible good results for the industry as a whole.) So, instead of insults, if anyone has a grip with them, please just point out SPECIFIC examples. Over time, if you find many egregious ones, that will speak for itself. Otherwise, I'd prefer to not be bothered with this. -- Rob McEwen http://dnsbl.invaluement.com/ r...@invaluement.com +1 (478) 475-9032
