ציטוט Mark Sapiro:
Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Are you getting the "deferral based on customer complaints"? If so, do you think they're lying about that, or something? (I'm not claiming that you or any of your clients are spamming, and I don't really care whether Yahoo customers are on average dumber than a fencepost; the question is about Yahoo procedures.)
Note: The following is an incoherent rant from a deranged and totally frusted person. You've been warned.
I'm getting the "deferral based on customer complaints" message. I looked it up on Yahoo's web site, and I followed a link to "Does Yahoo! Mail offer a feedback loop program to help senders minimize complaint rates?". I thought "good, I can sign up and find out who's reporting my mail as spam". Then I read further and found "To participate in the program, senders must sign their outbound emails with DomainKeys (DKIM is not currently supported)."
This is the second time in recent weeks that some large mail service has used it's 600 lb. gorilla status to try to coerce me into something, and I don't like it.
Actually, I don't care that much about Yahoo, because they do seem to accept my mail. My real complaint is with Microsoft and Hotmail. Several weeks ago, Hotmail started discarding some of my list mail, this quickly escalated from some to most to all. Note that they didn't reject it. Their MXs accepted it, but it never got delivered to any recipient, regardless of any whitelisting the recipients applied.
I eventually found my way to <https://support.msn.com/default.aspx> and submitted a report via the form linked as "Sender Information for Hotmail Delivery". I got a response to that (to their credit, they always responded) suggesting I add SPF records in DNS (more 600 lb.
SPF DNS records are now mandatory. Hotmail announced that they would not receive any mail from a source with no SPF record from the first day it became mandatory a couple of years ago, but did not actually carry out the threat at that time, however, it seems that they may now be implementing this. An SPF record supposedly reduces spammers ability to spoof your domain.
gorilla tactics), and giving me a hotmail.com address to send sample messages to, and requesting that I inform the responder of the subject header of any messages I send.
I tried to do this. I don't know what happened to the message I sent to the hotmail.com address, but my reply to the support rep bounced per
Action: failed Status: 5.1.0 Diagnostic-Code: smtp;554 5.1.0 Sender Denied
I took great pains to always use my postmaster address in reports and replies. I went through several iterations of submitting forms, receiving replies and being unable to respond to the follow-up questions in the replies (always with the same reject as above).
Also, at one point after putting SPF records in DNS, I tried to send an email per something I found on the support site to inform them of the domains (I can no longer find this instruction - I think it's been replaced by yet another web form). Here is the email I sent in it's entirety.
Return-path: <mark@msapiro.net> Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by msapiro.net with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from <mark@msapiro.net>) id JW535E-00003K-OA for senderid@microsoft.com; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 10:53:38 -0800 Message-ID: <47B1EB32.80602@msapiro.net> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 10:53:38 -0800 From: Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> Organization: Not Very Much User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: senderid@microsoft.com Subject: SPF records updated X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
grizz.org msapiro.net sbh16.songbird.com
And the ironic thing is here's what happened when my MTA tried to send it.
SMTP error from remote mail server after end of data: host mailb.microsoft.com [131.107.115.215]: 550 5.7.1 <Your e-mailwas rejected by an anti-spam content filter on gateway (131.107.115.215). Reasons for rejection may be: obscene language, graphics, or spam-like characteristics. Removing these may let the e-mail through the filter.>
Ultimately, I started submitting the web forms describing the problem as an inability to respond to follow-up information requests on outstanding tickets. This got someone's attention, and I am currently (temporarily) on a mitigation whitelist which is supposed to allow time for the filters to retrain.
We'll see.
If you read this far, thanks for listening. I don't expect any advice (but if you have some, I'm interested). I've just been so frustrated by this process that I had to vent a bit.
This mail was sent via Mail-SeCure System.
This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses.