[c0pium]

This happens to me all the time. There are two people, one in Massachusetts and one in Suffolk UK who have my same name and regularly put in FirstLast@gmail as opposed to the first.last@gmail that I use. The Massachusetts person does this because they forget that their gmail is the full version of “first” as opposed to the shorter version I use. The Brit is confusing gmail for hotmail. Yes really. Most people don’t care that much about computers. If it’s possible to screw up, someone will.

Someone gets righteously indignant that this cannot happen in every thread about dots in gmail, despite the fact that there are many people it happens to. They’re not making it up, why would someone do that?

[nmeofthestate]

>The Massachusetts person does this because they forget that their gmail is the full version of “first” as opposed to the shorter version I use.

So they just get their email wrong, and it's nothing to do with dotted variants.

[InsomniacL]

You own both FirstLast@gmail and first.last@gmail. Try send an email to both, and you should get both emails.

They are likely making a typeo elsewhere in their email address which is causing the confusion.

for example:

[e-mail]

[e-mail]

Notice one is Steve and the other is Steven, the dot has nothing to do with it.

[richardw]

Please look at my example up thread. It’s the combination of mistakes amplified by the dots. The dots make it worse by far.

I just searched for my name with no dots in my gmail. Man. It’s a dumpster fire. I have to put up with hundreds and hundred of wrong mails monthly because this feature amplifies the mistakes so much. And it adds to spam because other people type the wrong mails into forms and gmail “fixes” it by ignoring the lack of dots. It’s honestly infuriating. We know we own all versions. We get it. That’s what causes extra work for us and makes us like the product less.

My experience would be significantly improved if I could have all the non canonical addresses bounce. I agree that I would also like nobody else to own one of the other dot versions but that’s also possible.

[xigoi]

> My experience would be significantly improved if I could have all the non canonical addresses bounce.

I'm pretty sure you could set up a filter for that.

[richardw]

Yup, downside is people who have had others make mistakes, never see their mail.

[InsomniacL]

Can you please explain how the dots have any affect?

[richardw]

I did, here. Was it not enough info?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37339688

Rewritten: For various reasons, people mistype emails and they usually end up with a no-dotted address. Mine, as the catch-all, gets that mail.

A classic made up example is eg “fred.fredflintstone@gmail”. I have many times received mail for that person because I’m “fred.flintstone@gmail”. People see the double fred, remove the first and hit my account. I also get for “fredtflintstone” (notice the t, many don’t) and this last month “fredrflintstone”. Life would be much easier for all if gmail just bounced those when someone types it as “fredflintstone”. They’d check and fix it.

This is amplified by spam, because any leaks others make hits my account. They should bounce.

This morning I put up a filter to the no dot version. About a month ago someone put my no-dot version on their dodgy Microsoft ads account. I spent ages trying to get off it and somehow Microsoft still hasn’t taken me off. Now I’m just filtering that to deleted, along with mail for all the mistakes above. I’m done. Gmail’s dot policy enables this hugely.

[InsomniacL]

But in your example there is no difference wether Google’s dot policy exists or it doesn’t.

Someone could have setup a dodgy Microsoft ads account to your main email just as easily as the dotted/non-dotted version.

Where is the problem?

[richardw]

Firstly, thank you for engaging on it.

The problems:

1) people who are sending important emails are ending up with the wrong person and they don’t know. Fixing that takes effort on my part, I have to tell individuals or a group mail I’m the wrong person. A bounce would fix that, instantly with no effort. I sometimes try find the right person. That also takes effort, I have to look for clues. Locations, work hints etc.

2) I’m fairly careful with my email. Others aren’t. Most of the spam I get is linked to the wrong address. Those should also be bounces. Because I get mail for all dot variants, I get a multiplied amount of spam compared to just my version.

3) I’m pretty sure a dodgy money making racket is to sign people up via affiliate programs in the hope some of those get added. I see this in a huge amount of random email lists, products etc. I’d say 80% minimum of those use the no-dot version. The problem is that 80% I shouldn’t have to put up with. The people doing this are just being lists of addresses and firing them at anything that works. They aren’t targeting me, they’re just using the strings they’ve harvested. So they don’t know about the version I use.

The Microsoft issue pushed me over the edge. I’m now going to trash that entire set of problem for my own (selfish) purposes by filtering it out. The people being harmed are those whose contacts mis-type addresses and now eg invites to funerals will go to trash.

[InsomniacL]

also, consider the reduction in wrongly sent emails whereby user1 has

fred.flintstone@gmail

and user2 has

fredflintstone@gmail

forgetting a dot is far more likely than someone missing an entire word out of an email address.

The dot policy forces email addresses to be more unique across multiple users and thus would reduce emails being received by the wrong person.

[richardw]

If they forgot a dot and received a "no such mailbox", they'd check and fix it.

Some data, sans opinion: I checked my trash this morning after clearing it out. Total messages in trash: 47. Trashed messages linked to the "fredflintstone" variant: 40, all of them spam. The other 7 are all real messages I've just deleted after reading, none of them are spam.

[ethbr1]

No one misunderstands that, as that's what parent said.

[c0pium]

I already said that, and it’s orthogonal to my point.