this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2023
82 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37927 readers
535 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I disagree on this point. Spam is a customer service and if a company will face the consequence if users are upset by to much spam which actually has been a reason folks used to abandon emails in the passed before spam filters got good which was done at the product level initially. The standards came later out of what was being done at each place independently.
I don't understand your rebuttal. Nothing actually counters anything I said other than you saying you disagree. The rest of the post isn't contradictive. I agree spam is bad. I agree it's important to stop it. My point is that spam servers can't meet the requirements listed above. The only behavior that Gmail is calling out is the amount of emails being sent, but they're still sending them. That's not countering spam. That's pushing people to use their own system which is identical but isn't free.
yeah I think I misunderstood you. I thought you were saying there was not reason to block if they met all the standards. Which just turns sending spam into the get your link high ranked type or thing.