>
> The /recipient/ of the messages is *not* the problem. The /source/ of
> the messages *is* the problem.
>
> What is done with what is received is independent of the source of the
> problem.
>
Yes! This is absolutely true. Some of the members of this list use mail
servers whose outbound ema
On 1/3/21 8:40 AM, Peter Coghlan wrote:
Grant,
Hi Peter,
Do you think it is likely that an email address like
check212...@gmail.com is used by an actual real person for their
personal email?
I absolutely do.
Multiply the odds of the above by the odds that some spammer
or other individual
> Hi Peter,
>
> About two minutes of searching lead to this:
> https://support.google.com/mail/contact/abuse. The keywords were "gmail
> report spam abuse", which led me to a page that was centered on
> organizations using Gmail as their backend and how to file a report against
> them that Google
On 1/1/21 4:24 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
Does "Joe Job" mean anything to you?
There is also the possibility that the bounce recipient is a perfectly
legitimate user that is the victim of someone else purposely doing
things to cause bounces (and other crap) to be sent to them.
If an
On 1/1/21 2:24 PM, Peter Coghlan via cctalk wrote:
You misunderstand. What is Gmail / Google specific about it is
that this is going on for nearly 5 years using the same recipient
mailbox because it is so far impossible to let Google know about it
so that Google can can delete the mailbox bein
> My issue with Google and evil is that they provide no way that I can
> find to bring abuse of Google facilites (to send spam for example)
> to their attention so that the abuse can be stopped. For example,
> someone has been testing my mail server to see if it can be used to
> relay spam by
Hi Peter,
About two minutes of searching lead to this:
https://support.google.com/mail/contact/abuse. The keywords were "gmail
report spam abuse", which led me to a page that was centered on
organizations using Gmail as their backend and how to file a report against
them that Google will handle.
On 1/1/21 6:43 AM, Peter Coghlan via cctalk wrote:
My issue with Google and evil is that they provide no way that I can
find to bring abuse of Google facilites (to send spam for example)
to their attention so that the abuse can be stopped. For example,
someone has been testing my mail server t
ffort than trying to fix google
>
> Dave
> G4UGM
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: cctalk On Behalf Of Peter Coghlan
> > via cctalk
> > Sent: 01 January 2021 13:44
> > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
> >
>
Dave
G4UGM
> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk On Behalf Of Peter Coghlan
> via cctalk
> Sent: 01 January 2021 13:44
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
>
> Subject: Re: Emails going to spam folder in gmail
>
> Hi Mike,
>
&
Hi Mike,
Thanks for chiming in on this.
> Disclaimer: I don't speak for Google ...
> Large corporations (Google included) are basically a scaling problem,
> especially when it comes to customer service. I think that's pretty
> obvious, and stories about YouTube problems and account access are l
On Thu, Dec 31, 2020 at 07:43:12PM -0800, Michael Brutman via cctalk wrote:
> Disclaimer: I don't speak for Google ...
> The thread shows a lot of Google bashing. Insinuating that Google makes it
> difficult so that people follow the path of least resistance is part of
> that.
I didn't insinuate
Disclaimer: I don't speak for Google ...
The thread shows a lot of Google bashing. Insinuating that Google makes it
difficult so that people follow the path of least resistance is part of
that.
For years I had a non-Google backed email system and I did not have
problems with sending or receiving
> It seems easier to bash Google than it is to debug the actual problems.
I think this is an unfair characterization of the frustrations people have
voiced. I agree individual engineers aren't out to get people with private
mail servers, but:
> There are a lot of factors that
> need to be conside
It seems easier to bash Google than it is to debug the actual problems.
I work at Google; not on Gmail but on things that many of you use daily. I
don't believe my colleagues are trying to build market share by annoying
specific users and dropping their mail. There are a lot of factors that
need
On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 10:18:56AM -0500, Chris Zach via cctalk wrote:
> > Attempting to pull in this thread a tad, there are relatively simple
> > measures that can be taken to bring a private mail server into compliance
> > with gmail, Amazon, Microsoft level mail server protocol and
> > authenti
> > The only conclusion I can draw is that Google is arbitrary and doesn't
> > care and I'm one of the rare beneficiaries of their arbitrariness.
>
> I'm quite convinced that Google isn't arbitrary. It's just that there
> are a LOT more variables in play than we know about, much less have
> co
And just to add on a data point (Bill, I know you're not the enemy here), one
of my personally-maintained mail servers does TLS and the other doesn't, I do
have proper reverse DNS but used not to, and while I have SPF I've never done
DKIM, and I've never had any trouble getting mail to Gmail.
Ri
On 12/30/20 4:35 PM, Cameron Kaiser via cctalk wrote:
The only conclusion I can draw is that Google is arbitrary and doesn't
care and I'm one of the rare beneficiaries of their arbitrariness.
I'm quite convinced that Google isn't arbitrary. It's just that there
are a LOT more variables in pla
> As I said, I don't have problems sending mail to Amazon, Microsoft or any of
> the large (or small) email providers except for gmail.com and other Google
> email services. It really is just Google. I do have DNS properly configured,
> SPF in place and no TLS. I can't be bothered setting up TLS
On 12/30/20 13:55, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
On Wed, 30 Dec 2020, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
That's not true.
You don't have to do the cryptographic heavy lifting on the classic
computer. You can easily do the cryptographic heavy lifting on other
more contemporary computers which are us
On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 11:35 AM Peter Corlett via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 10:13:40AM -0500, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote:
> [...]
> > Attempting to pull in this thread a tad, there are relatively simple
> > measures that can be taken to bring a private mai
On Wed, 30 Dec 2020, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
That's not true.
You don't have to do the cryptographic heavy lifting on the classic computer.
You can easily do the cryptographic heavy lifting on other more contemporary
computers which are used as a smart host for the classic computers.
S
On 12/30/20 9:35 AM, Peter Corlett via cctalk wrote:
This means that classic computers can no longer send email, because
they don't have enough grunt to overcome this artificial barrier.
That's not true.
You don't have to do the cryptographic heavy lifting on the classic
computer. You can ea
>
> Attempting to pull in this thread a tad, there are relatively simple
> measures that can be taken to bring a private mail server into compliance
> with gmail, Amazon, Microsoft level mail server protocol and
> authentication. Its not just gmail. The simplest measures are done with
> DNS and
On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 10:13:40AM -0500, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote:
[...]
> Attempting to pull in this thread a tad, there are relatively simple
> measures that can be taken to bring a private mail server into compliance
> with gmail, Amazon, Microsoft level mail server protocol and
> authentic
On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 10:19 AM Chris Zach via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> > Attempting to pull in this thread a tad, there are relatively simple
> > measures that can be taken to bring a private mail server into compliance
> > with gmail, Amazon, Microsoft level mail server protocol
Attempting to pull in this thread a tad, there are relatively simple
measures that can be taken to bring a private mail server into compliance
with gmail, Amazon, Microsoft level mail server protocol and
authentication. Its not just gmail. The simplest measures are done with
DNS and TLS. Most o
>
> Of course. It makes trouble to other net users and tries to preserve
> itself by hiding complaints. Life would be easier for it if it
> actually tried to imitate poorly working spam catcher.
>
> Now imagine that there is no "off switch". It can only be persuaded by
> sending email to it, but si
On Tue, Dec 29, 2020 at 11:25:13AM -0500, Chris Zach via cctalk wrote:
> >Google need to review their motto and start living by it.
>
> Google ditched their "Don't be evil" motto a long long time ago. Now
> it's "what is best for google?".
Well, I do not think goog needs to do anything other than
Yes, I know. I have an email from 2005 saying that I was forced to give
it up 'a few years ago' with them saying they were being discontinued,
but don't have the original email. I lost some stuff when I converted
from Eudora to Thunderbird. However I dropped my membership of the
computer society
Google need to review their motto and start living by it.
Google ditched their "Don't be evil" motto a long long time ago. Now
it's "what is best for google?".
If google became a sentient AI (quite possible) it's a pretty damn
selfish one.
CZ
My original email alias was from computer.org. Then I got a mysterious
email saying that they were no longer going to offer computer.org email
aliases, so I switched to ieee.org.
Really? When did that happen, you should still be able to re-sign up for
one using that link. Give it a try.
I h
My original email alias was from computer.org. Then I got a mysterious
email saying that they were no longer going to offer computer.org email
aliases, so I switched to ieee.org.
I had one site refuse to let me use my ieee.org email address to log on
since the initial request came from a google
Bill Degnan wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 8:11 PM jim stephens via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On 12/28/2020 2:25 PM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
> > > On Mon, 28 Dec 2020 at 23:12, Bill Degnan via cctalk
> > > wrote:
> > >> Hi,
> > >> I have noticed the same email
You're kidding? I actually *wrote* the entire E-account, E-Alias, and
E-commerce system used by the IEEE Computer Society back in 1995, and I
keep my membership because of the mail forwarding to my home address.
Amazingly enough the forms I developed are still used, and I'd guess the
back end
The IEEE also uses google!
One of my NetBSD correspondents simply blocks all mail from google
servers on his system!
cheers,
Nigel
Nigel Johnson, MSc., MIEEE, MCSE VE3ID/G4AJQ/VA3MCU
Amateur Radio, the origin of the open-source concept!
Skype: TILBURY2591 nw.john...@ieee.org
On 2020-12-29
Google has more resources than me. How about they update their systems to
match Internet email standards?
The big problem isn't google doing it: They can do whatever they want.
The problem comes when state and local governments switch to google mail
services and now your constituents can no lo
n via
> cctalk
> Sent: 29 December 2020 11:16
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
>
> Subject: Re: Emails going to spam folder in gmail
>
> On Tue, 29 Dec 2020 at 00:29, Nemo Nusquam via cctalk
> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you both for your infor
On Tue, 29 Dec 2020 at 00:29, Nemo Nusquam via cctalk
wrote:
>
> Thank you both for your information but I am still mystified as to why
> Gmail marks Google alerts (from Google!) as spam.
That is particularly amusing/irritating, yes.
I have 3 or 4 connected accounts -- AOL, Hotmail, Yahoo, etc.
On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 05:12:09PM -0500, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote:
[...]
> For those of you who run your own mail servers please consider updating
> your DNS / authentication to match gmail standards.
Google has more resources than me. How about they update their systems to
match Internet ema
On Mon, 28 Dec 2020 at 23:50, Bill Degnan wrote:
>
> Liam,
> As I said I can set up a filter but that does not really solve the problem it
> compensates for it in the cctalk world only.
OK, that's fair. If I stuck a finger in the air and guesstimated, I'd
say about 95% of my email is filtered, a
On 12/28/2020 6:24 PM, Bill Degnan wrote:
I do this for a living so I am speaking professionally here.
The comment is about the Gmail filters working. Their spam filtering
is what you refer to.
All of my filters work randomly. I also get emails from their own
sources in the form of go
I've had similar problems with gmail (I get my mail via POP3, not over
the web). I solved it by "whitelisting" the problem sites.
Here's a "how to":
https://www.jotform.com/help/404-how-to-prevent-emails-from-landing-in-gmails-spam-folder
--Chuck
On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 8:11 PM jim stephens via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 12/28/2020 2:25 PM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
> > On Mon, 28 Dec 2020 at 23:12, Bill Degnan via cctalk
> > wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> I have noticed the same email addresses' messages routinely end up i
On 12/28/2020 2:25 PM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2020 at 23:12, Bill Degnan via cctalk
wrote:
Hi,
I have noticed the same email addresses' messages routinely end up in the
spam folder of gmail.
I have 2 nested folders (labels/tags/whatever) in Gmail:
classiccmp/talk and c
Long ago, some mailing list people found that some newbies, rather than
properly UNSUBSCRIBE, after sending a message directly to the list saying,
"UNSCRIBE ME", would then proceed to mark their incoming messages from the
list as "SPAM" in order to stop receiving them. GOOGLE, would of course,
On Mon, 28 Dec 2020, Nemo Nusquam via cctalk wrote:
Thank you both for your information but I am still mystified as to why Gmail
marks Google alerts (from Google!) as spam.
True Independence of departments?
When the spam filter people encounter something that THEY consider spam,
they don't fe
On 12/28/20 17:58, Peter Coghlan via cctalk wrote:
> Apologies for asking but what the gmail standards? Anything from >
yahoo.com, some of Google's own alerts, and items from >
lists.dwarfstd.org were all marked as spam.
They really won't tell you. I run into problems with them from time
to
> Apologies for asking but what the gmail standards? Anything from
> yahoo.com, some of Google's own alerts, and items from
> lists.dwarfstd.org were all marked as spam.
They really won't tell you. I run into problems with them from time to
time, they seem to want to only talk to microsoft.co
On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 5:25 PM Liam Proven via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Dec 2020 at 23:12, Bill Degnan via cctalk
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> > I have noticed the same email addresses' messages routinely end up in the
> > spam folder of gmail.
>
> I have 2 nested folders (l
Apologies for asking but what the gmail standards? Anything from
yahoo.com, some of Google's own alerts, and items from
lists.dwarfstd.org were all marked as spam.
They really won't tell you. I run into problems with them from time to
time, they seem to want to only talk to microsoft.com type
On 12/28/20 17:12, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote (in part):
I have noticed the same email addresses' messages routinely end up in
the spam folder of gmail.
[...]
For those of you who run your own mail servers please consider
updating your DNS / authentication to match gmail standards.
Apologies
On Mon, 28 Dec 2020 at 23:12, Bill Degnan via cctalk
wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I have noticed the same email addresses' messages routinely end up in the
> spam folder of gmail.
I have 2 nested folders (labels/tags/whatever) in Gmail:
classiccmp/talk and classiccmp/tech. In my rule which filters messages
i
Hi,
I have noticed the same email addresses' messages routinely end up in the
spam folder of gmail. It's no big deal for me to check my spam folder but
it's an extra step and messages can be lost.
For those of you who run your own mail servers please consider updating
your DNS / authentication to
55 matches
Mail list logo
