Is it just me, or has this mailing list died?
Is it just me, or has this mailing list died?
CGS composed on 2026-04-28 14:59 (UTC):
Is it just me, or has this mailing list died?
I'm on lots of mailing lists besides this one. Traffic on most has drastically fallen off in recent months and/or years.
No, the list is well alive -- for instance current April 2026 <https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2026/04/threads.html>
Fairly often, I see a reply to a message (on debian-user) but didn't see / receive the original post.
Fairly often, I see a reply to a message (on debian-user) but didn't see / receive the original post.
This is an example.
Any clues?
I'd be interested to hear any (even two word) reviews of their sofas?Provides seating. ? Andy Davidson
Oops - I think I sent this by accident to Norwid rather
than the list.
On Tue, 28 Apr 2026, at 16:20, Norwid Behrnd wrote:
No, the list is well alive -- for instance current April 2026 <https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2026/04/threads.html>
I get a 403 on that & also: https://lists.debian.org/
(You don't have permission to access this resource.)
?? - what?
I can, though, access: https://www.debian.org/
(Using Firefox 115.35.1esr (64-bit).)
On Tue 28 Apr 2026 at 18:13:58 (+0100), Jeremy Nicoll wrote:
I can, though, access: https://www.debian.org/
(Using Firefox 115.35.1esr (64-bit).)
A bot blocker that needs JS, perhaps?
Fairly often, I see a reply to a message (on debian-user) but didn't see/
receive the original post.n the
This is an example.
Any clues? I guess there could be a variety of causes, one might be that someone posted the original to a different list or directly to a person o
list and the reply was directed to the list.my
It's not an urgent matter, just something that has tugged at the back of
brain for a while.
On Tuesday, April 28, 2026 11:48:29 AM Felix Miata wrote:
CGS composed on 2026-04-28 14:59 (UTC):
Is it just me, or has this mailing list died?
I'm on lots of mailing lists besides this one. Traffic on most has drastically fallen off in recent months and/or years.
gmail often errs on the side of not accepting email or sending it to
spam folder, even when the sender is also from gmail.
Fairly often, I see a reply to a message (on debian-user) but didn't see/
receive the original post.n the
This is an example.
Any clues? I guess there could be a variety of causes, one might be that someone posted the original to a different list or directly to a person o
list and the reply was directed to the list.my
It's not an urgent matter, just something that has tugged at the back of
brain for a while.
On Tuesday, April 28, 2026 11:48:29 AM Felix Miata wrote:
CGS composed on 2026-04-28 14:59 (UTC):
Is it just me, or has this mailing list died?
I'm on lots of mailing lists besides this one. Traffic on most has drastically fallen off in recent months and/or years.
On Tue, Apr 28, 2026 at 2:49?PM <rhkramer@gmail.com> wrote:
Fairly often, I see a reply to a message (on debian-user) but
didn't see / receive the original post.
This is an example.
Any clues? I guess there could be a variety of causes, one might
be that someone posted the original to a different list or directly
to a person on the list and the reply was directed to the list.
It's not an urgent matter, just something that has tugged at the
back of my brain for a while.
I've noticed the same thing as a GMail user. I often see folks on the
list reply to a message and I receive the reply before the original
message arrives in my Inbox.
It seems like GMail stores some emails before forwarding them to the
next MTA or MUA. I guess -- and it is merely a guess -- GMail is
holding the message in a type of quarantine to classify the message
[as legitimate or spam].
On Tuesday, April 28, 2026 11:48:29 AM Felix Miata wrote:
CGS composed on 2026-04-28 14:59 (UTC):
Is it just me, or has this mailing list died?
I'm on lots of mailing lists besides this one. Traffic on most has drastically fallen off in recent months and/or years.
I think Felix's observation is a different one. I think GMail is
rejecting a lot more messages as spam using headers like DMARC, SPF,
and DKIM.
On Tue, 2026-04-28 at 18:03 +0000, Andy Smith wrote:
gmail often errs on the side of not accepting email or sending it to
spam folder, even when the sender is also from gmail.
Worse, it accepts mail & then doesn?t deliver it (sometimes not even to
the Spam folder). It?s just not a reliable service to use, period.
If they want reliable e-mail, people should move to other e-mail
solutions instead.
On Tue, 2026-04-28 at 18:03 +0000, Andy Smith wrote:
gmail often errs on the side of not accepting email or sending it toWorse, it accepts mail & then doesn\u2019t deliver it (sometimes not even to the Spam folder). It\u2019s just not a reliable service to use, period.
spam folder, even when the sender is also from gmail.
If they want reliable e-mail, people should move to other e-mail
solutions instead.
On Tue, 28 Apr 2026, at 19:16, David Wright wrote:
A bot blocker that needs JS, perhaps?
Doubt it; JS isn't disabled here; I also don't run either ad- or script-blockers.
rhkramer@gmail.com (HE12026-04-28):
Fairly often, I see a reply to a message (on debian-user) but didn't see
/ receive the original post.
The original post was from @gmail.com, and yours too.
Do you ever receive any mail from that domain through a Debian
mailing-list?
Fairly often, I see a reply to a message (on debian-user) but didn't
see / receive the original post.
This is an example.
Any clues? I guess there could be a variety of causes, one might be
that someone posted the original to a different list or directly to a
person on the list and the reply was directed to the list.
It's not an urgent matter, just something that has tugged at the back
of my brain for a while.
On Tuesday, April 28, 2026 11:48:29 AM Felix Miata wrote:
CGS composed on 2026-04-28 14:59 (UTC): > Is it just me, or has this
mailing list died?
I'm on lots of mailing lists besides this one. Traffic on most has
drastically fallen off in recent months and/or years.
rhkramer@gmail.com writes:
Fairly often, I see a reply to a message (on debian-user) but didn't
see / receive the original post.
The original is on linux.debian.user, on usenet. Maybe that's a better
way to view the list.
Hi,use,
On Tue, Apr 28, 2026 at 09:17:49PM +0200, Jan Claeys wrote:
On Tue, 2026-04-28 at 18:03 +0000, Andy Smith wrote:
gmail often errs on the side of not accepting email or sending it
to spam folder, even when the sender is also from gmail.
Worse, it accepts mail & then doesn?t deliver it (sometimes not
even to the Spam folder). It?s just not a reliable service to
period.
A Google employee on the "mailop" mailing list once said that there is absolutely no intentional way for gmail to silently discard an email,
unless a user with a Workspaces account has added filtering rules to
do that.
On the other hand, as someone whose business sends out invoices by
email, I have had recipients at gmail.com swear that they only paid
late because "we never received the email", despite me showing Exim
logs where gmail accepted it.
So I honestly do not know who to believe on that particular point.
If they want reliable e-mail, people should move to other e-mail
solutions instead.
I can only assume that it's not actually that important for most
users, and they would rather occasionally lose email and blame it on
gmail than actually take some action to improve matters.
A Google employee on the "mailop" mailing list once said that there is absolutely no intentional way for gmail to silently discard an email,
unless a user with a Workspaces account has added filtering rules to do
that.
On the other hand, as someone whose business sends out invoices by
email, I have had recipients at gmail.com swear that they only paid late because "we never received the email", despite me showing Exim logs
where gmail accepted it.
So I honestly do not know who to believe on that particular point.
"Anything free is worth what you pay for it"
"Anything free is worth what you pay for it"
There is a difference.
I wish for the freedom to edit gmail's source code... ;)
Joe (HE12026-04-28):
"Anything free is worth what you pay for it"Are you sure you want to say that on a Libre Software mailing-list?
Regards,
nwe (HE12026-04-28):no
Do you really believe nobody here believes there's no difference betweenThere is a difference."Anything free is worth what you pay for it"
I wish for the freedom to edit gmail's source code... ;)
the free of Google and the free of Debian?
And now, please observe that the saying above does not make thegot it
difference between the free of Google and the free of Debian.
On Tue, 28 Apr 2026, at 19:16, David Wright wrote:
On Tue 28 Apr 2026 at 18:13:58 (+0100), Jeremy Nicoll wrote:
I can, though, access: https://www.debian.org/
(Using Firefox 115.35.1esr (64-bit).)
A bot blocker that needs JS, perhaps?
Doubt it; JS isn't disabled here; I also don't run either ad- or script-blockers.
Who knows? I don't?sorry.
Andy Smith [2026-04-28 19:40:40] wrote:
A Google employee on the "mailop" mailing list once said that there is absolutely no intentional way for gmail to silently discard an email, unless a user with a Workspaces account has added filtering rules to do that.
On the other hand, as someone whose business sends out invoices by
email, I have had recipients at gmail.com swear that they only paid late because "we never received the email", despite me showing Exim logs
where gmail accepted it.
So I honestly do not know who to believe on that particular point.
I think the answer lies in the definition of "discard" and at which
stage this can happen. Like all MTAs, Gmail routinely silently drops
email on the floor on the basis that it's presumed to be "spam".
So Google's employee must have been referring to something else, like "discarding after spam filtering" or something like that.
Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
Andy Smith [2026-04-28 19:40:40] wrote:
A Google employee on the "mailop" mailing list once said that
there is absolutely no intentional way for gmail to silently
discard an email, unless a user with a Workspaces account has
added filtering rules to do that.
On the other hand, as someone whose business sends out invoices by
email, I have had recipients at gmail.com swear that they only
paid late because "we never received the email", despite me
showing Exim logs where gmail accepted it.
So I honestly do not know who to believe on that particular
point.
I think the answer lies in the definition of "discard" and at whichIs that really true? My domains and mail are hosted on a small[ish]
stage this can happen. Like all MTAs, Gmail routinely silently
drops email on the floor on the basis that it's presumed to be
"spam". So Google's employee must have been referring to something
else, like "discarding after spam filtering" or something like that.
ISP in the UK. As far as I'm aware absoltely **all** E-Mail that
arrives there and is addressed to me will get sent to me, unless **I**
decide to drop some by setting some filtering criteria.
Joe (HE12026-04-28):
"Anything free is worth what you pay for it"
Are you sure you want to say that on a Libre Software mailing-list?
I would argue that libre software is not completely free of charge, but almost always requires some unpaid effort on the part of the user,
whereas Gmail is made easy to use, if it does what you want. Most
people have never configured an email client.
I wrote too quick.
I think we all agree Google's kind of 'free' is opposite from Debian's kind of free.
"Anything free is worth what you pay for it"Ah, no. Google isn't free. We know that by now, don't we?
On Tue, 28 Apr 2026 14:59:55 -0000 (UTC) CGSFWIW, I parsed the original question as being in reaction to the dearth
<etphonehomefrance@gmail.com> wrote:
Is it just me, or has this mailing list died?
This mailing list is not dead yet. If people keep giving good answers
to questions, I don't see it dying in the future either.
FWIW, I parsed the original question as being in reaction to the dearth
of messages which had then been coming through... in the preceding mere
few *days*.
On Tue, 28 Apr 2026 19:40:40 +0000ot
Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 28, 2026 at 09:17:49PM +0200, Jan Claeys wrote:
On Tue, 2026-04-28 at 18:03 +0000, Andy Smith wrote:
gmail often errs on the side of not accepting email or sending it
to spam folder, even when the sender is also from gmail.
Worse, it accepts mail & then doesn?t deliver it (sometimes n
o use,even to the Spam folder). It?s just not a reliable service t
period.
A Google employee on the "mailop" mailing list once said that there is absolutely no intentional way for gmail to silently discard an email, unless a user with a Workspaces account has added filtering rules to
do that.
On the other hand, as someone whose business sends out invoices by
email, I have had recipients at gmail.com swear that they only paid
late because "we never received the email", despite me showing Exim
logs where gmail accepted it.
So I honestly do not know who to believe on that particular point.
If they want reliable e-mail, people should move to other e-mail solutions instead.
I can only assume that it's not actually that important for most
users, and they would rather occasionally lose email and blame it on
gmail than actually take some action to improve matters.
"Anything free is worth what you pay for it"
If you're not paying for it, then YOU are the product.
A Google employee on the "mailop" mailing list once said that there is absolutely no intentional way for gmail to silently discard an email,
unless a user with a Workspaces account has added filtering rules to do
that.
So I honestly do not know who to believe on that particular point.
I think the answer lies in the definition of "discard" and at which
stage this can happen. Like all MTAs, Gmail routinely silently drops
email on the floor on the basis that it's presumed to be "spam".
So Google's employee must have been referring to something else, like "discarding after spam filtering" or something like that.
(Sorry to TW for replying to wrong place.)
On Wed, 29 Apr 2026, at 11:44, The Wanderer wrote:
FWIW, I parsed the original question as being in reaction to the dearth
of messages which had then been coming through... in the preceding mere
few *days*.
Spring has just arrived (at least in the UK & I assume Europe & the US).
Chances are gardens & house maintenance will be drawing people away from computers.
[...]I think the answer lies in the definition of "discard" and at which
stage this can happen. Like all MTAs, Gmail routinely silently drops
email on the floor on the basis that it's presumed to be "spam".
Is that really true?
Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
I think the answer lies in the definition of "discard" and at whichIs that really true?
stage this can happen. Like all MTAs, Gmail routinely silently
drops email on the floor on the basis that it's presumed to be
"spam". So Google's employee must have been referring to something
else, like "discarding after spam filtering" or something like that.
Once SMTP servers started refusing connections from dodgy senders (no
PTR record, no complementary A/PTR pair, etc.) it was realised that some
SMTP servers would still accept the mail. Forging the From: header to
the real target of the spam would cause this person not to be found by
the gullible SMTP server, so it would bounce the *entire* spam message
'back' to the alleged sender. The bounce came from a 'legitimate'
sender, so was accepted by the intended target SMTP server and
delivered to the recipient.
On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 18:02:25 +0100, Joe wrote:
Once SMTP servers started refusing connections from dodgy senders
(no PTR record, no complementary A/PTR pair, etc.) it was realised
that some SMTP servers would still accept the mail. Forging the
From: header to the real target of the spam would cause this person
not to be found by the gullible SMTP server, so it would bounce the *entire* spam message 'back' to the alleged sender. The bounce came
from a 'legitimate' sender, so was accepted by the intended target
SMTP server and delivered to the recipient.
For the record, this kind of attack involves falsifying the envelope
sender address, not the From: header. Bounce messages are sent to
the envelope sender. The From: header is strictly ornamental as far
as SMTP is concerned, though some MTAs may use it in their spam
detection heuristics, or in their client email acceptance policies.
Sorry, yes, not quite awake. It's the Reply To: where the bounce is
sent, but if that isn't set in the headers, the envelope address is
copied to a new Reply To. A spammer makes sure the Reply To: is set.
The bounce mechanism is part of the message processing, after the SMTP transaction has already accepted the message. A rejection during the transaction simply terminates the SMTP handshake, sending an
explanatory message back to the actual sending IP address and never
actually receiving any of the message body or headers. There's no way to route the rejection to anywhere other than the sender IP address, since that's the other end of the transaction. The envelope sender address may
not resolve to the sender IP address, though it generally must resolve
in DNS.
A rejection is far better than a bounce, using less bandwidth and never involving any other party.
One of the main problems of twenty years or
so ago was than many businesses used an ISP to receive their email
which was then downloaded to the company server by POP3, or very occasionally, IMAP4. Whatever the company server did, the ISP's server
had already accepted the email, so if the recipient didn't exist, the
company server had no option but to either bounce it or drop it.
Sorry, changing the focus, I feel the need to rant and mention something
that happened to me once. (I have some documentation on it, I made a
police report, and I have a log of telephone activity on Google which
proves it.
(And I don't think (I'm getting younger over time ;-), and as I
do, my memory gets worse. ;-(
On Tuesday, April 28, 2026 03:40:40 PM Andy Smith wrote:
A Google employee on the "mailop" mailing list once said that there is absolutely no intentional way for gmail to silently discard an email, unless a user with a Workspaces account has added filtering rules to do that.
I once made a voice call to one of my financial institutions, and got a scammer instead of the financial institution.
I made two subsequent calls to the same number, documented by the Google voice telephone log. The log showed that I dialed the same number all 3 times -- one went to a scammer / spammer, the next two got to the
financial institution.
I made a police report and I tried to investigate how that could happen,
and in the course of doing so, posted something on one of the google
support forums (right word?) about what happened.
Someone on the list, whom I later realized was somehow a Google employee (maybe someone paid somehow to monitor the forums (and maybe provide help
in some cases?), replied to say that was *absolutely impossible*,
absolutely could not happen.
Shortly thereafter, my post to the list disappeared.
_uckers!
On Thursday, April 30, 2026 09:55:36 AM rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
Sorry, changing the focus, I feel the need to rant and mention somethingDarn, in the sentence below, the train left the station and got lost -- still missing. :-(
that happened to me once. (I have some documentation on it, I made a
police report, and I have a log of telephone activity on Google which
proves it.
(And I don't think (I'm getting younger over time ;-), and as I
do, my memory gets worse. ;-(
On Tuesday, April 28, 2026 03:40:40 PM Andy Smith wrote:
A Google employee on the "mailop" mailing list once said that there isI once made a voice call to one of my financial institutions, and got a
absolutely no intentional way for gmail to silently discard an email,
unless a user with a Workspaces account has added filtering rules to do
that.
scammer instead of the financial institution.
I made two subsequent calls to the same number, documented by the Google
voice telephone log. The log showed that I dialed the same number all 3
times -- one went to a scammer / spammer, the next two got to the
financial institution.
I made a police report and I tried to investigate how that could happen,
and in the course of doing so, posted something on one of the google
support forums (right word?) about what happened.
Someone on the list, whom I later realized was somehow a Google employee
(maybe someone paid somehow to monitor the forums (and maybe provide help
in some cases?), replied to say that was *absolutely impossible*,
absolutely could not happen.
Shortly thereafter, my post to the list disappeared.
_uckers!
Would somebody sent this guy the original post and bring this thread to an END!Now: was /this/ a personal rant?
PS: This reflector is NOT A Place for your personal rants.
Besides you Google People a rich enough to hire someone to answer phone!Tell that to your mail provider: I'd bet an LLM will pick up the
| Sysop: | Jacob Catayoc |
|---|---|
| Location: | Pasay City, Metro Manila, Philippines |
| Users: | 5 |
| Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
| Uptime: | 493853:23:31 |
| Calls: | 146 |
| Files: | 547 |
| D/L today: |
6 files (97K bytes) |
| Messages: | 76,985 |