[maxclark]

I empathize with the author's viewpoint - maybe it's just my personal experience of running email for large corporations and ISPs but there's a reason why these systems have ended up with zero tolerance policies for spam sources.

It's just not worth the overhead in people and hardware to try to be surgical in your approach - you don't win anything. It's the closest thing to working at the DMV for tech.

Notes, cc:Mail, Groupwise, Exchange, Sendmail, Exim, qmail, postfix, etc... I have no interest in running my own email ever again.

[bloppe]

> there's a reason why these systems have ended up with zero tolerance policies for spam sources

The article is not about blackholing spam sources. It's about blackholing mail from sources that have never sent a single spam message since the dawn of the internet.

[jwestbury]

It's not, though - it's about blackholing unknown sources. Yes, this makes it incredibly difficult to self-host or to start up a new provider in the space. But from the perspective of anyone trying to protect their users, it makes sense.

By definition, every new source has never sent spam -- but it's reasonable to assume that an unknown source is likely spam, however unfortunate that may be.

[linehedonist]

This author claims to be sending alumni newsletters from his server. I hey you anything that someone has (at least once) marked one of those newsletters as spam.