Quotes from this thread (and the nolisting site which was posted as a response):
Michael Scheidell -> "Do NOT use a bogus mx as your lowest priority." Bowie Bailey -> "I would say that it is too risky to put a non-smtp host as your primary MX" nolisting.org -> "longterm use has yet to yield a single false positive " Marc Perkel -> "YES - it works... I have had no false positives at all using this." I am interested in this technique, and have been for some time. It seems like every discussion of it leads to a group saying "you will lose mail" and a group saying "you will not lose mail". Is there any way to resolve this once and for all? It's hard for me to see why either side would misrepresent the truth, but obviously someone is wrong here. One thing I notice (and I certainly could be wrong here)... the proponents seem to be actually using nolisting and claiming no problems, whilst those against the idea seem to be predicting problems rather than reporting on actual issues they have experienced. -Aaron
