[madez]

When someone in a company agrees on a meeting in their office with someone from outside the company, and the visitor arrives at time well-dressed and is rejected by the companies security without any explanation, then who is at fault? It is not the visitor, it is the awful cooperation between the person in the company and their companies security.

It is entirely reasonable to show how you've handed your mail to gmail and they refused it without actionable explanation, so it is a problem between the recipient and gmail.

[jjirsa]

GMail being at fault isn't going to make up for a missed invitation (or RSVP) to a special event, or not getting a note of congratulations on an accomplishment, or not getting a message of condolences.

Assigning blame is done after the fact to make up for a mistake.

Just avoid the mistake.

[madez]

If one completely disregards political consequences, and generally anything but personal short-term benefit, I agree with your reasoning. Otherwise, I see not how that would be possible. And I think arguing just for short-term practicality is deeply flawed; by that you'd also cooperate with a murdering dictator if it helped you personally.

[number6]

You can run into this on any service. Colleagues on Office365 got mail filtered by spam. There are false positives on every service.

If I get an explanation from the server I will fix it. I get dmarc reports and I make sure all pass. That's all I can do.