On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 16:08:34 -0600
"@lbutlr" <krem...@kreme.com> wrote:

> There is a difference between ___block___ and ___silently discard___.

> Blocking is fine, silently discarding is just evil and should be
> illegal everywhere.

Nonsense.

Silently discarding is sometimes the only sensible thing to do.  If
you have users with different spam settings (or perhaps some who have
opted-out of spam-scanning completely), there's no sensible way to
handle a multi-recipient message.  You either have to tempfail all
recipients after the first so you can process with each recipient's
settings during SMTP, which is horrible, or you have to generate DSNs
for the recipients who reject the message, which will get you
blacklisted as a backscatterer.

> You can reject who you want in Germany too, you just can___t delete a
> message that you___ve already accepted.

What does "accepted" mean?  Redirecting a message to /dev/null means you
didn't accept it.

I used to be in the "never silently discard camp", but unfortunately the
email environment has become so hostile that I can no longer keep the
promise of the original SMTP that a message is either delivered or
the sender notified of non-delivery.  Promising that in every single
case is, alas, no longer feasible.

Regards,

David.

Reply via email to