On 2/27/19 3:41 AM, grarpamp wrote:

On 2/27/19, Shawn K. Quinn <skquinn@rushpost.com> wrote:

...

Looks more like Google got blacklisted by one of the lists

Yeah missed that, thanks.

...

an account that can't email *@gmail.com is much less useful than one that can.

Gmail needs to die.

I use a GMail account as a junk catcher and for redundant offsite backups of encrypted files. So I don't look at it often - and did not notice when they silently terminated my access a few weeks ago. Why? Because I don't use a web browser or Google "app" to access it. I use IMAP via Thunderbird. Google decided they don't like that, probably because it slashes GMail's surveillance capabilities to the bone while making numerous other service providers available in one convenient location. It only took a few minutes to troubleshoot the problem thanks to teh interwebs. One can restore access by solving a fairly easy maze (follow the path of greatest resistance, per "UX Funnel" page layouts, and click through multiple scary warnings) to turn on access by "less secure apps". In this context less secure would mean not owned by Google, since the configuration I use presents as the most secure and convenient way to access GMail - literally by orders of magnitude. Google just sent me a helpful message begging me to stop what I'm doing before Very Bad Things happen to me, and turn my computer over to them. It's nice to know they care - and as long as I'm getting those, I know they have not sabotaged the account again. Speaking of annoyances, am I the only one who finds the word "app" annoying, and the suggestion that I use "apps" vaguely insulting? I guess I identify more with Dilbert than with The Guys In Marketing... :o/