[SURBL-Discuss] In response to May 8th "Help!!!' posting
pete at mollysrevenge.com
Sun May 17 18:33:21 CEST 2009
Hear, hear to this post! Emails to my band's legitimate, opted-in
mailing list were recently blocked because the newsletter service we
use is blacklisted on this site. I can't even mention the name of the
service in this email because it then gets rejected by my ISP when I
try to send it!
This is a ridiculous situation and saying that you are not blocking
anything is an unacceptable denial of responsibility. You are
providing the means for email to be blocked and recommending ISPs use
it so accept your responsibility.
What I and anyone else sending out legitimate emails must have is a
way for our emails to be delivered and NOT classified as spam.
Cavalier approaches to blocking spam which cause havoc to legitimate
emails are just not acceptable.
> You missed my point. When I tried to send email to the whitelist
> address given, it
> was rejected.
> All I'm saying is that people should be given an opportunity to
> clear their name.
> Your system assumes that the blacklisted domain has been sending
> advertising and
> you want to judge whether it's spam or not. If we don't use the
> domain for
> advertising, we have no way of complying with your form
> requirements. When we
> tried to contact you using the alternate method, our email was
> rejected by your
> servers, because it is on your blacklist.
> I understand that you are not blocking anything, but recommending it
> to people who
> trust your list results in the same thing. We have to go to each
> recipient and ask
> that they stop using your list in order to get our mail through. It
> would be
> better for all concerned, to make it easier to correct the problem
> at it's source.
> The present system clogs up the list with things that should be
> handled in
> private, and results in people having to drop your service in order
> to receive
> legitimate email. That means the spammers win.
> BTW, How would blacklisting a domain NOT hurt legitimate email from
> that domain?
> Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
> > Hi!
> >> "We just do not handle delisting requests on the mailinglist.
> Thats not
> >> what is is here for."
> >> That is understood. What is not understood is why it is so hard
> to get a delisting
> >> request through proper channels, that many have to resort to this
> list out of
> >> desperation. If we don't have the magic formula to get the site
> to accept our
> >> request, and our mail is rejected, what are we supposed to do?
> >> You call us spammers and slam the door in our face. As bad as
> spam is, I think it
> >> is worse to interfere with legitimate email and provide no way to
> report mistakes.
> > With every list there will be people saying it will hurt their
> > mailflow. We do not block anything hoewever. Its every
> mailproviders free
> > choise to pick a list for filtering mail.
> > If your delisting request wasnt handled like you expected drop a
> not on
> > whitelist at surbl.org and we will follow up with you there.
> > Thanks,
> > Raymond.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Discuss mailing list
> > Discuss at lists.surbl.org
> > http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
-------------- next part --------------
More information about the Discuss