4 ms·

What percentage of your reach do you lose if google blacklists your domain?

by thisgoesnowhere 3y ago

rvz 3y ago
*silence*
- yellowapple 3y ago
  FYI: comments like yours are more effective when posted at least a day later, lest they end up looking silly when the "silence" is eventually broken - as it is now.
  - rvz 3y ago
    It is still very effective, it took you a day later to respond to the parent. OP Comment: 25 April 2023, 00:41:52 AM Yours: 26 April 2023, 03:18:06 AM I was expecting a response much earlier than that since the answer is very obvious. Instead you decided to come up with a typical anecdote which can easily be dismissed. The main fact is, almost everyone knows that you lose LOTS of users emailing you once a provider like GMail blocks you as it is the most used email provider. [0] [0] https://mailchimp.com/resources/most-used-email-service-providers https://mailchimp.com/resources/most-used-email-service-prov...
    - yellowapple 3y ago
      > It is still very effective, it took you a day later to respond to the parent. My apologies for not being terminally online. > Instead you decided to come up with a typical anecdote which can easily be dismissed. Which is fair, but 1. It still makes your "silence" comment look premature, and 2. If even I can still get mails delivered to GMail inboxen as an ordinary person running a personal mail server, an actual (legitimate) business should have no trouble with that whatsoever, and 3. There was more in that comment besides the anecdote, and your decision to dismiss it out-of-hand - much like your decision to prematurely declare the existence of "silence" on a topic - does not reflect charitably on you. > The main fact is, almost everyone knows that you lose LOTS of users emailing you once a provider like GMail blocks you Do you have any examples of GMail blocking its own users from sending an email to a domain it doesn't like? Like I mentioned in the other comment: it's more typical for it to be the other way around, and more typical than that for it to be a soft block (mail going to Spam) than a hard block (hard bouncing of mail). Unless you've got such an example, calling that a "fact" (let alone the main one) would make Elastigirl pull a muscle; like sure, that'd indeed be pretty thoroughly inconvenient, much like it'd be inconvenient if Behemecoatyl took over my mind and compelled me to shut down my mail server, but I'm unaware for much (non-fictional) precedent for either. Even in my anecdotal case where AT&T does indeed hard-bounce emails from me to my grandpa, my grandpa can still send me emails just fine.
      - rvz 3y ago
        > My apologies for not being terminally online. So says the one with 9000+ HN points, sitting here for a decade and still commenting here every. day. There's no need for you to apologize for making me laugh at you for not being able to look at the time and it's clear you're very upset over the *silence* comment. > 1. It still makes your "silence" comment look premature, and Premature to what? The answer is obvious to everyone and the link I gave earlier already explains the amount of email users one would lose if they were filtered and blacklisted from Gmail which is the whole point of the parent's comment. If I were to collect lots of emails for a newsletter, I can guarantee you that most of them will be Gmail users and if my domain was blacklisted by Gmail, my reach will be significantly limited, either having it being sent straight into the spam folder or even outright blocked by Gmail by the advanced spam filters. > 2. If even I can still get mails delivered to GMail inboxen as an ordinary person running a personal mail server, an actual (legitimate) business should have no trouble with that whatsoever. But most people still go with centralized services as outlined by the article I gave earlier, and they don't run their own email services either. What if this 'actual (legitimate) business' is using GSuite, Exchange, etc which has the same anti-spam checks and blacklists as well? > Do you have any examples of GMail blocking its own users from sending an email to a domain it doesn't like? It has been known that GMail has a so-called 'dangerous url' list(s) to prevent its own users from sending emails to domains on their blacklist. [0] There are countless reports on social media which GMail blocks the sending of emails from such domains. Once example: [1], and another [2]. In both cases either way, the centralized email providers get to decide what goes through their spam filters and blacklists and that negatively affect those running their own email servers and trying to reach users that are on centralized email providers like Gmail. Henceforth such problems like this [3]. So in conclusion: Your reach will be significantly limited if you do not pass Gmail's spam filters (or any other of the major email providers filters) and users don't run their own services because: (1) They are not techies or sysadmins, (2) Even if they were they can't deal with the insurmountable spam issues and (3) They would rather sign up to a managed solution on a centralized platform than maintain it themselves. Hence this again: [4] [0] https://support.google.com/mail/troubleshooter/2696779#ts=9283752%2C2696840 https://support.google.com/mail/troubleshooter/2696779#ts=92... [1] https://twitter.com/rk_namo/status/1027469262556778497 https://twitter.com/rk_namo/status/1027469262556778497 [2] https://twitter.com/Marcia_Cat/status/1196387907172364295 https://twitter.com/Marcia_Cat/status/1196387907172364295 [3] https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/13/23403259/google-gmail-republicans-gop-spam-filtering-program-midterms https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/13/23403259/google-gmail-re... [4] https://mailchimp.com/resources/most-used-email-service-providers https://mailchimp.com/resources/most-used-email-service-prov...
yellowapple 3y ago
Not everyone needs "reach"¹. In my case, if Google blacklisted my domain, worst-case scenario would be a handful of people who wouldn't get my emails, and I'd have to reach them by other means. I'm actually dealing with this right now², except with AT&T instead of Google, and all that's lost is my ability to email my grandpa. More realistically, even when Google "blacklists" a domain, it typically just means emails from it end up in spam. "Check your spam folder" is sufficiently disseminated advice-wise that it ain't really all that big of a deal in practice whether Google arbitrarily decides my mailserver doesn't look sufficiently legitimate. If Google's taking measures more extreme than sending emails to Spam, then it's almost certainly because the server operator is doing something horribly, horribly wrong - like "running an open relay" levels of wrong. ---- ¹: I'd go further and argue that any emails from domains operated by people who actually do care about "reach" probably should be rejected and/or sent to Spam/Junk - namely, because they largely are spam/junk. Hell, I'd go further than that and say that I know of precisely zero domains which both care about "reach" and refrain from sending junk mail. I do know of plenty of domains that think they're special snowflakes whose unsolicited marketing fluff emails are totally legitimate and not at all spam and therefore it's totally unfair that their "reach" metrics are below 100% because of those big meanies and their spam filters. Needless to say, I take their complaints about their "reach" with a Dell PowerEdge R750 sized grain of salt. ²: Actually more severe than the usual case with Google, since AT&T does outright refuse to deliver mail from servers it doesn't like - and despite mine appearing on no blacklists of any sort, and despite AT&T repeatedly denying in various support fora that it maintains any blacklist of its own, I get hard bounces from their servers, and complete silence when following the very support processes said bounce emails describe. Oh well.

What percentage of your reach do you lose if google blacklists your domain?

rvz 3y ago

*silence*

yellowapple 3y ago
FYI: comments like yours are more effective when posted at least a day later, lest they end up looking silly when the "silence" is eventually broken - as it is now.
- rvz 3y ago
  It is still very effective, it took you a day later to respond to the parent. OP Comment: 25 April 2023, 00:41:52 AM Yours: 26 April 2023, 03:18:06 AM I was expecting a response much earlier than that since the answer is very obvious. Instead you decided to come up with a typical anecdote which can easily be dismissed. The main fact is, almost everyone knows that you lose LOTS of users emailing you once a provider like GMail blocks you as it is the most used email provider. [0] [0] https://mailchimp.com/resources/most-used-email-service-providers https://mailchimp.com/resources/most-used-email-service-prov...
  - yellowapple 3y ago
    > It is still very effective, it took you a day later to respond to the parent. My apologies for not being terminally online. > Instead you decided to come up with a typical anecdote which can easily be dismissed. Which is fair, but 1. It still makes your "silence" comment look premature, and 2. If even I can still get mails delivered to GMail inboxen as an ordinary person running a personal mail server, an actual (legitimate) business should have no trouble with that whatsoever, and 3. There was more in that comment besides the anecdote, and your decision to dismiss it out-of-hand - much like your decision to prematurely declare the existence of "silence" on a topic - does not reflect charitably on you. > The main fact is, almost everyone knows that you lose LOTS of users emailing you once a provider like GMail blocks you Do you have any examples of GMail blocking its own users from sending an email to a domain it doesn't like? Like I mentioned in the other comment: it's more typical for it to be the other way around, and more typical than that for it to be a soft block (mail going to Spam) than a hard block (hard bouncing of mail). Unless you've got such an example, calling that a "fact" (let alone the main one) would make Elastigirl pull a muscle; like sure, that'd indeed be pretty thoroughly inconvenient, much like it'd be inconvenient if Behemecoatyl took over my mind and compelled me to shut down my mail server, but I'm unaware for much (non-fictional) precedent for either. Even in my anecdotal case where AT&T does indeed hard-bounce emails from me to my grandpa, my grandpa can still send me emails just fine.
    - rvz 3y ago
      > My apologies for not being terminally online. So says the one with 9000+ HN points, sitting here for a decade and still commenting here every. day. There's no need for you to apologize for making me laugh at you for not being able to look at the time and it's clear you're very upset over the *silence* comment. > 1. It still makes your "silence" comment look premature, and Premature to what? The answer is obvious to everyone and the link I gave earlier already explains the amount of email users one would lose if they were filtered and blacklisted from Gmail which is the whole point of the parent's comment. If I were to collect lots of emails for a newsletter, I can guarantee you that most of them will be Gmail users and if my domain was blacklisted by Gmail, my reach will be significantly limited, either having it being sent straight into the spam folder or even outright blocked by Gmail by the advanced spam filters. > 2. If even I can still get mails delivered to GMail inboxen as an ordinary person running a personal mail server, an actual (legitimate) business should have no trouble with that whatsoever. But most people still go with centralized services as outlined by the article I gave earlier, and they don't run their own email services either. What if this 'actual (legitimate) business' is using GSuite, Exchange, etc which has the same anti-spam checks and blacklists as well? > Do you have any examples of GMail blocking its own users from sending an email to a domain it doesn't like? It has been known that GMail has a so-called 'dangerous url' list(s) to prevent its own users from sending emails to domains on their blacklist. [0] There are countless reports on social media which GMail blocks the sending of emails from such domains. Once example: [1], and another [2]. In both cases either way, the centralized email providers get to decide what goes through their spam filters and blacklists and that negatively affect those running their own email servers and trying to reach users that are on centralized email providers like Gmail. Henceforth such problems like this [3]. So in conclusion: Your reach will be significantly limited if you do not pass Gmail's spam filters (or any other of the major email providers filters) and users don't run their own services because: (1) They are not techies or sysadmins, (2) Even if they were they can't deal with the insurmountable spam issues and (3) They would rather sign up to a managed solution on a centralized platform than maintain it themselves. Hence this again: [4] [0] https://support.google.com/mail/troubleshooter/2696779#ts=9283752%2C2696840 https://support.google.com/mail/troubleshooter/2696779#ts=92... [1] https://twitter.com/rk_namo/status/1027469262556778497 https://twitter.com/rk_namo/status/1027469262556778497 [2] https://twitter.com/Marcia_Cat/status/1196387907172364295 https://twitter.com/Marcia_Cat/status/1196387907172364295 [3] https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/13/23403259/google-gmail-republicans-gop-spam-filtering-program-midterms https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/13/23403259/google-gmail-re... [4] https://mailchimp.com/resources/most-used-email-service-providers https://mailchimp.com/resources/most-used-email-service-prov...

yellowapple 3y ago

Not everyone needs "reach"¹. In my case, if Google blacklisted my domain, worst-case scenario would be a handful of people who wouldn't get my emails, and I'd have to reach them by other means. I'm actually dealing with this right now², except with AT&T instead of Google, and all that's lost is my ability to email my grandpa. More realistically, even when Google "blacklists" a domain, it typically just means emails from it end up in spam. "Check your spam folder" is sufficiently disseminated advice-wise that it ain't really all that big of a deal in practice whether Google arbitrarily decides my mailserver doesn't look sufficiently legitimate. If Google's taking measures more extreme than sending emails to Spam, then it's almost certainly because the server operator is doing something horribly, horribly wrong - like "running an open relay" levels of wrong. ---- ¹: I'd go further and argue that any emails from domains operated by people who actually do care about "reach" probably should be rejected and/or sent to Spam/Junk - namely, because they largely are spam/junk. Hell, I'd go further than that and say that I know of precisely zero domains which both care about "reach" and refrain from sending junk mail. I do know of plenty of domains that think they're special snowflakes whose unsolicited marketing fluff emails are totally legitimate and not at all spam and therefore it's totally unfair that their "reach" metrics are below 100% because of those big meanies and their spam filters. Needless to say, I take their complaints about their "reach" with a Dell PowerEdge R750 sized grain of salt. ²: Actually more severe than the usual case with Google, since AT&T does outright refuse to deliver mail from servers it doesn't like - and despite mine appearing on no blacklists of any sort, and despite AT&T repeatedly denying in various support fora that it maintains any blacklist of its own, I get hard bounces from their servers, and complete silence when following the very support processes said bounce emails describe. Oh well.