Comments on: Missing an Email? It may be Media Temple’s Fault

By: Ross

Ross — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 01:00:05 +0000

Hmm…that would be very silly of them, I didn’t realize they were doing this.

By: Chris Meller

Chris Meller — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 02:16:23 +0000

John: Where did you get this information? I only yesterday moved my final email account off of the (mt) grid because of their limiting.

By: John

John — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 01:35:37 +0000

(mt) just recently decided to turn this feature off on the grid server.

By: Patrick Domack

Patrick Domack — Mon, 26 Nov 2007 07:59:16 +0000

I had this issue today, cause I run several mailservers that use greylisting, and well, callbacks don’t work well when greylisting is implemented. I know a LOT of people use greylisting, and don’t know anyone that used callback.

By: Chris Meller

Chris Meller — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 18:22:50 +0000

And to top it off, the eventual response I got from Media Temple was

a suitable alternative would be to either get a (dv) Dedicated-Virtual Server or find a third-party mail host such as Google-hosted email.

So in order to get all my email, I should pay you guys twice as much a month so I can get a higher plan? Sounds vaguely like extortion to me…

By: Chris Meller

Chris Meller — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 18:20:04 +0000

Gary: I refer again to my example: Wordpress. How many millions of blogs out there are sending out automated messages on a regular basis from a wordpress@domain.com email address that no one ever thought to actually setup?

How many times have you gotten an email from a company, confirming an order, support request, etc. that told you not to respond, as it was from an un-monitored account? Granted most companies actually setup those accounts, but the point still remains: it does happen.

In principle, I agree with you - there should always be a way for me to respond to an email I receive. In practice, however, the internet has not followed such trends, and that’s the issue. Maybe we *shouldn’t* have this problem, but we most certainly do.

Simply stating that it helps increase security for your dumb users and discarding the potential consequences is not the way to operate on today’s internet. Spammers certainly have no problem getting their messages through to user accounts en masse, and this is not going to significantly reduce the number of messages I receive - the majority of them are from spoofed legitimate email addresses (like myself) anyway.

So you’re inconveniencing a ton of people while not significantly accomplishing anything… To me, that’s the definition of a bad idea.

By: Gary

Gary — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 13:01:57 +0000

Unacceptable…why? I can’t think of a single good reason that anyone should be sending an email message out with an intentionally incorrect return address. Do you send letters to mail order companies with non-existant return addresses on them?

I can think of several BAD reasons for non-existant return addresses. Spammers find it useful. If you send a newsletter but are too lazy or simply don’t care to sift through the responses and/or remove the addresses that bounce .. then perhaps it is ‘useful’.

Tell me one legitimate reason that anyone would want to send a non-replyable email message?