Avaaz in "grave danger" due to GMail spam filters

[Moon Jones]

I realised that my last few hours were in defence of Google. I'm not. 
I'm just against the vocal minority forcing some third party to do 
something just because it feels right to that minority. So the talk is 
one based on principle.

On 20.08.2013 23:34, Ted Smith wrote:
> Avaaz depends on Google delivering all mail sent to the user to the
> user. Possibly modulo unsolicited or "spam" mail.

I used to have a Gmail account, a separate Youtube account and yet 
another for Picasa. They are all gone. And I can say it was qick and 
clean. Something I can't say even for sites perceived as good such as 
Ubuntu Forums.

But most webmail providers give some options. Such as do not make spam 
out of addresses that are in Contacts. Even those who don't offer this 
option explicitly, make malware links available far easier for people 
that I have in Contacts. One can also make sorting rules. A mail failing 
this most probably is spam. Even if the receiver doesn't feel that.

> In a similar sense, Google could break this list, by censoring it on
> Gmail. Should it do that?

Now that is something quite different. Do you feel it's about the same? 
How come?

> Any infrastructure provider can break any company or organization that
> uses its infrastructure. But we expect infrastructure to be fair.

Yes. Of course.

You see, I might be very upset with the contract I am given to sign by 
the power company. They [the company] say clauses are non negotiable, 
even if I feel they [the clauses] are abusive. My alternatives are to 
move in a different country or use solar panels and light the room with 
candles. Although very romantic in this eco concept, that might turn 
very expensive. So I feel having access to power is very important. And 
I am left with filing with the consumer protection agencies hoping 
enough people are bothered by those clauses.

On the other hand I can use Google or I can search a provider in India. 
I can use Vmail.me which is in France even if the name says Montenegro, 
and I can try Riseup which swear they won't give data, although the law 
specified they have to obey. And I do. I have accounts with all of them. 
In other words people stay with gmail because they like the server and 
don't care about what has been written in every newspaper in the so 
called Western world. It's not for me to decide for them, or I'd become 
some sort of Stalin. Today I rule what Google should do, tomorrow I am 
going to tell you what you should do.

> FYI, Avaaz is a liberal activist group. They send people who sign up
> with them various petitions to sign or campaigns to donate to. If their
> emails are shunted into a "bulk mailings" folder, then they'll be
> effectively crippled.

I didn't know that. Thank you for the information.

And yes, to me it sounds like a good idea what Google is said to be 
doing. Although I have my doubts Google targets anyone in particular. 
Finding a good site, reading about a good cause and getting involved 
seems like the thing to do. Bleeding people out of microsums that seem 
harmless on a huge scale usually helps the few full time employees and 
little more.