On Tue 30 Aug 2016 at 17:49:34 +0100, Joe wrote: > On Tue, 30 Aug 2016 09:59:42 -0400 > Henning Follmann <hfollm...@itcfollmann.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 02:52:14PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > > On Tuesday 30 August 2016 14:05:36 Stefan Monnier wrote: > > > > "shocked that anyone would want to design or use an > > > > unreliable messaging system" > > > > > > Email is getting less and less reliable, so have you given up using > > > it?? :-( > > > > > > Lisi > > > > > > > However, why email is still reliable, because a proper setup provides > > you with a well defined error messages (in case it is not delivered). > > > > If an email is designated as spam, it will be *silently* dropped. It > took mail admins a long time to realise that if a message was spam, the > last thing they should do with it is to 'return' it to the apparent > 'sender' as part of a bounce message.
It is taking users a much, much longer time to realise that mail admins are making decisions to drop mail which is intended for them (very often without being involved in the choice). Now, if the postal service did this....
