On 5 Oct 2020, at 05:06, Keith Moore <moore(_at_)network-heretics(_dot_)com>
wrote:
On 10/4/20 11:48 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Sunday, October 4, 2020 10:18:08 PM EDT Keith Moore wrote:
It's because I care about Internet email, and having it work well.
It's because I hate to see Internet email lose out to FacedOut and
LockedBook and Tooter and Frop and most of the other profoundly
dysfunctional toys that people use for interpersonal messaging these
days. It's because (and I'll probably regret saying this) RFC821,
RFC822, and their descendants have actually held up fairly well in terms
of functionality, especially in comparison to these toys, though there's
clearly a need for improvement by now.
I'd like to think that other people here also care about having Internet
email work well, but so far the loudest people just seem to be screaming
for their right to sabotage it. Maybe there's some good intent and
good faith buried in those arguments, but it's hard to see.
My advice would be stare harder.
In my view, email without spam filtering would be totally unusable.
Well, in my experience, that depends. I operate some accounts with no spam
filtering, some with, using different accounts for different purposes. That
has worked fairly well for me. I do get some spam on the unfiltered
accounts, but not enough to be terribly bothersome, and it's certainly better
to leave spam filtering off for those accounts than to risk losing a gig.
I operate all my accounts with no server side spam filtering. It’s actually
quite bothersome. But given my client base (people who are falling afoul of
filters) the other options for letting potential clients contact me are
unappealing to me.
(I have other accounts that get horrendous amounts of spam despite having
spam filtering. I'm phasing those out but it can take a long time to update
everyone's idea of your email address.)
Have you never accidentally deleted a wanted message? I’ll be honest, I won’t
believe you if you say no.
Spam filtering email may cause problems, but it is still a net benefit.
I do find spam filtering useful in some instances, but don't see a general
net benefit. Sometimes it's a win, sometimes it's a huge lose.
Filtering is about more than blocking spam. It’s about blocking malware and
viruses, it’s about blocking phishing. It’s about providing a safer environment
for end users.
It's necessary precisely because email is such a great messaging system.
I don't follow that. Certainly spam filter is sometimes necessary, though,
because email is so accessible.
What's your solution? Don't filter and deliver everything isn't a solution.
It merely transfers the problem to someone else.
Agree, but I wouldn't expect the optimum to be at such an extreme anyway.
I don’t think having a static IP with a consistent hostname and HELO/EHLO is an
extreme requirement in the least.
I have some ideas, but I don't think I could work out the entire solution by
myself. And in an environment with as much hostility as this one, I don't
think suggesting something that isn't both comprehensive and comprehensible
is likely to produce any kind of constructive discussion.
That statement has gone past passive aggressive and is, itself, hostile. And
likely a violation of the list code of conduct.
laura
--
Having an Email Crisis? We can help! 800 823-9674
Laura Atkins
Word to the Wise
laura(_at_)wordtothewise(_dot_)com
(650) 437-0741
Email Delivery Blog: https://wordtothewise.com/blog
_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp