[Leica] LUG mail being blocked by bad ISPs, some people auto-unsubscribed

[leica_r8 at hotmail.com (Aram Langhans)]

I have my main mail through q.com, which was Qwest and is now Centurylink. 
A while back I could not post any responses to the LUG, nor could I e-mail 
you.  Everything was rejected, kicked back in my face (screen).  I 
unsubscribed and then resubscribed using a hotmail account - this account. 
At about the same time, all my q.com mail was also rejected from our local 
college, where I work in the summer.  I thought q.com was blacklisted 
somehow.  It now works with the college.  I could try it again with the LUG, 
but why bother.  My hotmail address works just fine.

Not sure if this is related or not, but it was terribly annoying.

Aram

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Brian Reid" <reid at mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2011 4:07 PM
To: <lug at leica-users.org>
Subject: [Leica] LUG mail being blocked by bad ISPs,some people 
auto-unsubscribed

> A bunch of LUG subscribers have been auto-unsubscribed because of a lazy 
> ideologue in Merrimack New Hampshire named Rik van Riel. Rik believes that 
> he has the only solution to the spam detection problem, and unfortunately 
> a few ISPs believe him.  Responsible ISPs use dozens upon dozens of 
> factors to classify something as spam. Since van Riel doesn't charge for 
> his spam-finding service, cheapo ISPs will sometimes use it and only it. 
> When van Riel's spam detectors make a mistake (which he, of course, 
> believes is not possible) then mail stops getting delivered to the 
> customers of the ISPs that depend on his free service.
>
> If you are one of the people whose LUG subscription went away, you can 
> think bad thoughts about Rik van Riel. Ideologues like him rarely change 
> their position as a result of argument from other people, so there is no 
> point trying to yell at him or reason with him. In a certain sense the 
> real villains are the owners of the ISPs that are too cheap to buy real 
> commercial spam-blocking service, which requires human participation and 
> is therefore not free.
>
> The only viable long-term solution to false-positive spam nightmares is to 
> find a responsible ISP. Cheapo ISPs are going to use cheapo spam-control 
> companies, who invariably lock onto free services run by ideologues.
>
> If you are one of the victims, you of course aren't getting this email, 
> but you might see it on the website or you might get a copy forwarded from 
> a friend.
>
>
>
>