[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-smtp] [Shutup] chatting with big gorillas, was Proposed Charter

2015-12-14 13:47:24

-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-smtp [mailto:ietf-smtp-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of 
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 11:07 AM
To: ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] [Shutup] chatting with big gorillas, was Proposed

On 14/12/2015 15:31, John Levine wrote:
 Talk about something that doesn't scale.

Oh, I know it won't scale. But if the assertion is that "gmail is so amazing 
no one ever needs to contact them" (which it was), then I'll dispute that.

Given that offering helpful support doesn't scale, so gmail can't/won't
answer 'postmaster' emails with a helpful reply, then maybe that's a reason
why information needs to be available to people so they can help
themselves, rather than hiding even more.

I do not work for gmail/google/alphabet but I have had the opportunity to see 
their responsiveness evolve over the years. Given that a lot of the contacts to 
them are on the level of "People really really really want my email so you need 
to put it in the inbox (rather than some other tab or the spam folder or 
rejected)", I can understand why they aren't generally more responsive. As both 
a sender and someone that has a gmail account (among other accounts), I believe 
they disposition pretty much correct. As a sender, in the last 8 - 10 years or 
so I've only found 2 (non recent) instances where it was something borked on 
their side that caused problems. Then again, my philosophy is that most people 
get the delivery they deserve - which fits nicely with their data driven 
approach. And then again, I'm an anti-abuse person, not a deliverability person 
so my perspective is biased.


ietf-smtp mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>