Stop thinking that silently rejecting an email isn't the same
as dropping.
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
STOP calling rejection a dropping.
Rejecting is NOT dropping.
They are two different things.
If you try to hand me an envelope, and I will refuse to take it, It is NOT
the same as if I took it and dropped to trash.
---
That's because I received a rejection.
You are blaming us for how internet communication works for years.
---
Until the past few years, email that was sent to me
was either received by me or the sender got a rejection message.
Your rant is completely useless.
---
Apparently you don't know what "rejecting" is, vs.
silently dropping it into the trash. The latter is dropping.
The former tells the sender there was a problem delivering
the email -- usually accompanied by the type of error.
In the former case, the sender knows something is
refusing to deliver the email and knows the sender didn't get
it. In the latter case, the sender "expects" that the user
is likely to have received it (because there was no message
send back that there was a problem delivering it).
If the sender gets a rejected message, they can
tell the listed-recipient that the email was rejected and
to please correct the problem. If they don't get anything
back, they won't even know what is wrong with the email
should they want to resend it.
To compound the issue, the recipient may not know
their email is being filtered since they asked for it NOT to be.
That their own mail-provider is the one doing the dropping after
that provider gave the impression that filtering was an option
to be turned off/on in the user-control-panel, and that
they had chosen "no filtering" is likely to be a bit miffed.
Since the user knows the incoming email wasn't spam
(after looking at the group archives), whether or not
it was rejected or dropped is a bit moot at that point.
