251–260 of 269 posts
The real shocker is that Linus Torvalds uses gmail, where you have no control over anything regarding your account (exhibit A: look an awesome new spam filter which you can't turn off!). I would never have thought he'd do that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're probably right. Mailing lists (of the discussion group variety, not marketing mail) often have problems with spam filter false positives, most commonly due to DMARC policies. There's not really a great solution to that at the moment - either you technically violate RFCs by having your your discussion group software modify some headers, or you deal with other kinds of breakage. Doing header rewrites is effectiv…
You only have to rewrite headers if your mailing list is actually modifying the mails i.e. doing a MITM attack on the mail flow. Some mailing list admins feel very strongly about footers, subject line tags etc and then claim they "must" rewrite the From header, but I am not sure it's technically required.
Here's an example: you have an address @google.com, which has a DMARC policy of 'quarantine'. You send a message from this address to a discussion group, which in the process, resends your message from a non-google server, thus failing DMARC.
Google's DMARC policy says that if an ISP receives a message from a @google.com From address and the message fails DMARC, that ISP should place the message in the spam folder.
So it boils down to: does a list operator change the From address in distribution group mail to use a list address they own in order to pass DMARC, or do you deal with the filtering consequences of failing DMARC for many domains?
The real shocker is that Linus Torvalds uses gmail, where you have no control over anything regarding your account (exhibit A: look an awesome new spam filter which you can't turn off!). I would never have thought he'd do that.
No. Google Apps for Work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are "flagging spam/not spam in those lists" but Google may then associate that list (not the content) as being spam or not. Google sees that mail comes from the list and decides based on that. This is why I never mark mailing list email as spam, even if it is in fact spam.
That's my point. Everything that went to spam, I flagged as "not spam".
If so, maybe gmail thinks "this sender is spammy". That's the mailing list.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I dont believe I said anything about vanity domains, so I dont know what you mean by that. I meant that email is broken in the sense that when some stranger mistakenly thinks that your email belongs to them, and continues to give it out or sign it up for mailing lists, you have absolutely no recourse. If you have an email address that like mine is easily mistaken for other ones you get incorrectly-addressed personal…
> so I dont know what you mean by that. I believe he means that if tizz.dogg@gmail.com was already taken, Google should offer tizz.dogg@loopyloop.com rather than tizz.dogg1@gmail.com. In fact they shouldn't even show that as an option. Since Google Is now a domain registrar they could create the new domains on the fly. Then there wouldn't be namespace collisions.
As for there being "no recourse" -- apart from spam, that's just wrong. It's much faster to reply with a "This is not your Smith"-mail, than it is to write a "return to sender" on an envelope. Same thing for getting phone calls from a different timezone etc.
[ed: I do agree that it's a bit more difficult with people that don't know their own address -- still think it should be quicker to reach their contacts via email than via comparable means.]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Not saying this isn't a problem, but it probably doesn't affect 99% of email users. So, with a conservative one billion email users, only 10 million users see this problem.
This is pedantry, but 1 billion isn't all that conservative. GMail announced ~425M users in June 2012 and announced 900M a month and a half ago.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> so I dont know what you mean by that. I believe he means that if tizz.dogg@gmail.com was already taken, Google should offer tizz.dogg@loopyloop.com rather than tizz.dogg1@gmail.com. In fact they shouldn't even show that as an option. Since Google Is now a domain registrar they could create the new domains on the fly. Then there wouldn't be namespace collisions.
Indeed. Google/Gmail do two strange things: a) While they support the age old username+whatever@gmail.com in order for users to hand out special addresses to mailinglists etc (eg: user+facebook@gmail.com, user+lkml@facebook.com) -- they don't distinguish on dots in the username (so username == user.name == u.ser.name etc). And b) they don't offer other domains than gmail.com, which leads to strange things like smith1…
Right, and I've sent literally hundreds of those emails. They almost never do any good, because while one person may fix your address in their contacts list, the original person who gave out the faulty address is still out there, unaware that they're giving out bad info. I always ask if the email sender can tell the intended recipient about this when they figure out the right address, but that rarely works. Anyway, I know this is a very specific problem that only affects a small fraction of people, but it's extremely annoying.
I dont really see how allowing other domains would help.. that just shifts the issue to the domain string instead of the user string. I guess it gives people more options. But one of the main benefits of gmail addresses is that it's so common. Everybody knows it, so nobody ever misspells the 'gmail' part at least.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"I would want in my inbox" Unfortunately that's not the definition of spam.
But that is his/her definition of spam. And as someone who has worked in the anti spam field, I'm ok with that. However I have the same problems Linus has so I am not excusing gmail one bit in this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. Google Apps for Work.
Well same thing, isn't it? Clearly he is forced to use a spamfilter with no opt-in or opt-out.