Gregory Nowak was quoted by Simon Hobson:

> > I have toyed more than once with the question of what would happen if
> > a group of us running our own mail exchanges made the choice to
> > reject mail from gmail.com with a 550? If a few of us did it, we might
> > miss mail we maybe wanted to get. If a bunch of us did it, then a
> > bunch of gmail users would complain to google. My guess is google's
> > response would be "this is a free service; if it doesn't work for you,
> > then don't use it.???
>
> No, I'll tell you what Google's response will be :
>
> "Our system is working fine, the other system is broken".
> Don't forget that this is a company that is quite happy to
> simply change the rules on the basis that it's big enough that
> the rest of the world will adapt. Look at the history of stuff
> they've "just changed" because it suits them. Sticking
> with email, they were one of the first to implement SPF
> fully knowing that it would break most mailing lists and
> mail forwarders around the world - and so most mailing lists
> around the world had to update software & change setups to suit
> Google's* new set of "how email is to work" rules. I know,
> I had a customer facing mail server** and mailing list server.

I am considering starting an admin list, where one can only
subscribe with an address starting with admin@... and
perhaps only one admin@... per IP.

While I support the right of consenting adults to indulge
in various risky behaviours, including bending over for
surveillance capitalists, I'd like to think that a more
selective list would lead to more worthwhile conversations.

I am perhaps a bit unkind when I say we have reached
the point where many people have been so captured by google
and similar that a form of Stokholm syndrome has set in,
and that useful conversation is often derailed with "but
actually I like ads that are relevant to my interests",
"the upgrade/feature treadmill is fun, and keeps us
all safe/buying stuff" - and I regard the entire
SPF/DKIM/DMARC/SRS/nonsense part of this.

I remember the propaganda being that encrypted mail
is too hard to implement, dear Barbie: And yet here we
are - we now are supposed to have full on signatures in
every mail, yet the keys aren't held by the user, and the
mail isn't private, and google spams me anyway - WTF, where
did we go wrong ?

I suppose I am derailing things - but if you think the
admin@ list is something worth doing, let me know
(off list is fine too)

regards

marc