ML's Email Blacklisting BS Excuse
-
@aaronstuder said in ML's Email Blacklisting BS Excuse:
@Danp said in ML's Email Blacklisting BS Excuse:
http://multirbl.valli.org/dnsbl-lookup/45.33.80.245.html
Looks blacklisted to me....
It's blacklisted on 4 out of 220 list. That's only 1.8%.
Missing 1.8% of the email, seems better then no emails at all....
1.8%? What if every email service reads those four lists? Office 365 either uses their own or those. Google either uses their own or those? Those two represent the highest volume of potential users, not 1.8%, easily 50% or more.
And each list does not represent one email provider. Email systems often query many of those RBLs. It was common ten years ago to leverage huge meta lists of blacklists to make sure that you were catching everyone. So even appearing on a single popular blacklist might block you from 90% of all email systems. So what you see as 1.8% or less, is easily 90% or more.
-
@Dashrender said in ML's Email Blacklisting BS Excuse:
@JaredBusch said in ML's Email Blacklisting BS Excuse:
@aaronstuder said in ML's Email Blacklisting BS Excuse:
@Danp said in ML's Email Blacklisting BS Excuse:
http://multirbl.valli.org/dnsbl-lookup/45.33.80.245.html
Looks blacklisted to me....
It's blacklisted on 4 out of 220 list. That's only 1.8%.
Missing 1.8% of the email, seems better then no emails at all....
Nope, that is not how it works.
And how do you know that 99% of your customers are not on Office 365?
It's extremely likely that O365 and Google is reading one of those 5 places, hence the black listing problems.
Also pretty likely that they run their own.
-
@scottalanmiller said in ML's Email Blacklisting BS Excuse:
@Dashrender said in ML's Email Blacklisting BS Excuse:
@JaredBusch said in ML's Email Blacklisting BS Excuse:
@aaronstuder said in ML's Email Blacklisting BS Excuse:
@Danp said in ML's Email Blacklisting BS Excuse:
http://multirbl.valli.org/dnsbl-lookup/45.33.80.245.html
Looks blacklisted to me....
It's blacklisted on 4 out of 220 list. That's only 1.8%.
Missing 1.8% of the email, seems better then no emails at all....
Nope, that is not how it works.
And how do you know that 99% of your customers are not on Office 365?
It's extremely likely that O365 and Google is reading one of those 5 places, hence the black listing problems.
Also pretty likely that they run their own.
If they do run their own, there has to be a way to appeal your information being on that list.
-
@Dashrender said in ML's Email Blacklisting BS Excuse:
@scottalanmiller said in ML's Email Blacklisting BS Excuse:
@Dashrender said in ML's Email Blacklisting BS Excuse:
@JaredBusch said in ML's Email Blacklisting BS Excuse:
@aaronstuder said in ML's Email Blacklisting BS Excuse:
@Danp said in ML's Email Blacklisting BS Excuse:
http://multirbl.valli.org/dnsbl-lookup/45.33.80.245.html
Looks blacklisted to me....
It's blacklisted on 4 out of 220 list. That's only 1.8%.
Missing 1.8% of the email, seems better then no emails at all....
Nope, that is not how it works.
And how do you know that 99% of your customers are not on Office 365?
It's extremely likely that O365 and Google is reading one of those 5 places, hence the black listing problems.
Also pretty likely that they run their own.
If they do run their own, there has to be a way to appeal your information being on that list.
In theory they do and in theory you can. But they may run their own and use others as well.
-
So what is the best way to do a mailer? I am using mailchimp which is free with small volume, but if I need more it get's pricey.
-
@IRJ said in ML's Email Blacklisting BS Excuse:
So what is the best way to do a mailer? I am using mailchimp which is free with small volume, but if I need more it get's pricey.
Differing opinions there. My opinion is... if you want very reliable email, you pay for it. Those services get that money for a reason, they really work. But you can put in the effort yourself and run your own for sure. It's a little risky... whether that means risk of delivery failure or risk of extra effort, you can mostly balance that yourself.
