Google seems to have broken email forwarding

Post by marcos123 » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 10:27 PM UTC

marcos123 wrote: post #33

andybak wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally speaking I downvoted your comment because I often downvote things that smack of conspiracy thinking - never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by stupidity. Another issue I have with your argument - I don't believe Gmail has the market share to make such a fiendish strategy viable.

So andybak, congratulations on clinging to a sweet sounding one-liner, but let's think a little more about it. So anytime something bad happens to a person (their wallet or phone is stolen, or their family dog is killed), and the victim believes the perpetrator acted maliciously, would you tell them that "smacks of conspiracy thinking" (whatever that means to you)? Another educational moment for you would be to look…

Post by fifthesteight » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 10:43 PM UTC

reitanqild wrote: post #152

fifthesteight wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've found that this community is beyond unwelcoming, bordering on toxic. I no longer see the merit in contributing, and furthermore I find that reading these comment threads has become less and less valuable.

Then I suggest you take a break yes. I find hn a really to be a really good combination of intelligent, grown up discussion with little name-calling etc. That said, I think on hn one must be prepared to be corrected, -that's just part of being scientifically minded. As the old saying goes: "Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another."

Post by DanBC » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 10:51 PM UTC

fifthesteight wrote: post #163

reitanqild wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then I suggest you take a break yes. I find hn a really to be a really good combination of intelligent, grown up discussion with little name-calling etc. That said, I think on hn one must be prepared to be corrected, -that's just part of being scientifically minded. As the old saying goes: "Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another."

Yeah that's the consensus, and that's what it was meant to be, that's what it once was. However these days, especially in a community where only certain individuals can downvote, they become the only ones to control the discussion. What was supposed to encourage a higher level of discussion has instead created a community that is the exact opposite. Who cares about my stupid comments, sure, I'm an idiot- I'll agree t…

Post by vacri » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 11:21 PM UTC

agwa wrote: post #123

jedbrown wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gmail's "send as" feature doesn't work that way. "A@dnalounge.com is logged in to GMail Web Client as A@gmail.com and sends a message to B@dnalounge.com. Google's SMTP servers deliver that to cerebrum.dnalounge.com with an envelope sender of A@gmail.com. (THIS IS WRONG ON SO MANY LEVELS.) cerebrum turns around and bent-pipe forwards back to Google's SMTP servers, who determine that Google's SPF record doesn't list ce…

In my >5 years experience running a mail server through which gmail users send authenticated mail, that is not accurate. To confirm that nothing has changed, I just looked at the mail logs, and in the last 24 hours I don't see a single instance of gmail doing what is described. In every single case, the envelope sender address is user@mydomain, not user@gmail.com.

Post by hurfdurferson » Fri, Mar 06, 2015, 1:15 AM UTC

RIMR wrote: post #138

Anyone else wondering why JWZ feels the need to complain when he is clearly using Gmail in a way that Google advises you not to? If he wants to use Gmail for his business he needs to get Google Apps. Having your employees use their personal e-mail accounts for business is completely unprofessional. Why even bother running an in-house mail server if all it does is forward e-mails? Cut the costs and pay for the service…