Re: <nettime> process reporting?

[Rich Kulawiec via Nettime-tmp <nettime-tmp@mail.ljudmila.org>]

On Sat, May 27, 2023 at 03:39:19PM +0200, Andreas Broeckmann via Nettime-tmp wrote:
> The more in-principle question for us here is: Why is the choice of those
> gmailed people for a particularly restrictive provider taken as the
> determining factor for the fate of Nettime? 

Focusing solely on Gmail misses the larger trends in how email is handled
(or not).  First, because they're not the only ones utilizing technology
like DMARC, and second, because however many sites are using it today,
more will be tomorrow.

I've written (elsewhere) about my view that all attempts to stop email
forgery are doomed -- for a variety of factors.  I thus view deployment
of DMARC (and DKIM et.al.) as pointless and foolish.  But my opinion
won't change what Gmail or Comcast or Verizon or anybody else is going
to do, so if I want to run mail systems and mailing lists, then I have
to keep this excellent quote from John Levine in mind:

	"The total budget at all receivers for solving senders' problems is $0."

And I have to do whatever I have to do to accomodate whatever it is they're
going to do. 

---rsk
#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: https://mail.ljudmila.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-tmp
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: