Tommy Dodd Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Admin action: extracted from http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=11809 and made a new Topic in the Lounge area, as it seems to be more of a philosphy discussion. The good news is that Yahoo have (according to Senderbase) 5,507 email servers. Of these only a few will be on the block-list at any one time so it's not a case of "hanging around for (at least) 24 hours every time someone uses Yahoo to send spam" 99 times out of a hundred (or more) your mail will be sent through one of the servers that is not on then blocklist. You were just unlucky this time. The wisdom of using a free, spammy, mailserver for important business mail is a whole other question. . . . and where would I find such a mailserver as a small business person? With respect, spam Cop is today blocking PAID Yahoo business servers based not on their IP address, but on their URL, which means that a whole range of IPs are caught in a false positive. This happens about twice a year or so. I would not object so strenuously to this if it meant my emails got tagged, but some (thankfully few) ISPs rely on SpamCop so completely that they black hole emails from servers on the list and neither sender or recipient even know it's happened. With power comes responsibility, and I believe that this practice of black listing a URL that handles hundreds of thousands of messages through a legitimate ISP should be stopped and that spam Cop should advise users to employ their black list as one or several filtering criteria, before black holing a message. If I use some smaller mom and pop ISP, is that an advisable thing for important business emails? (Don't answer; I've done it and it's not.) If I use any name brand ISP, I will have this problem, because if my ISP runs 5,000 servers and they work really really hard, they are still going to source spam from time to time, and this should be forgiveable for companies that genuinely attempt to control spam. I suggest creating a "white list" of IPs run by such responsible companies -- and yes they are going to include all the big players that the cyber-hippies hate. I submit that these false positive situations are causing more harm than the fleecing of suckers in pharmaceutical scams or DHL delivery notices. Let's get the balance right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.