Re problems with AOL subscribers and AOL postmaster response --
rex!engr.uky.edu!morgan (Wes Morgan) writes:
> For the record, I will state that I have received a prompt, courteous reply
> from AOL staff (including David) to *every* complaint of comment I have
> since David took over as liason. (In this environment, I define 'prompt'
> 48 hours) Yes, there were some communication lapses prior to his watch,
> that is, after all, the past.
email@example.com (Edward J. Branley) replies:
>No, it's not the past. It's the present. Not to mention the 80+
>bounce messages I got yesterday (about evenly divided between
>three "thirty-day wonders" and two full mailbox users). That's the
>reality of allowing aol.com users to sign on my lists.
I, too, have received very prompt and polite replies from David O'Donnell
and any other AOL staff member I contacted. But Edward, as far as the
bouncing mail is concerned, wouldn't a low-to-no bounce tolerance policy elimi
nate your problem? And wouldn't that be a bit less extreme that refusing all
AOL subscriptions? (Re your comment: "I'm also curious to know if anyone
here has decided to reject subscriptions from users in the domain aol.com.")
I find it wildly ironic that if you implemented such a policy, you would be
able to subscribe to my list run from AOL (which you do), yet I wouldn't be
able to subscribe to yours. I continue to experience many more problems,
proportionally, from my non-AOL subscribers than the AOL members, but if
*anyone's* mail bounces more than once, I remove them -- if they want to get
back on the list, they'll contact me.