AOL, Rootsweb and LostCousins

[Clive Blackaby]

Members who use AOL as their service provider won't have seen this, so I hope you won't mind me posting an extract from the latest Lost Cousins newsletter, especially as it also affects Rootsweb (and possibly ACDB as well):

I'm sure we're all in favour of ISP taking action against spammers, but surely there must be a better way than this

I quote:-

THE END OF FREE E-MAIL?
In our last newsletter we mentioned the problems that LostCousins and Rootsweb were having, with all of the emails from certain servers being blocked by AOL.

What we hadn't seen at that time was an article that appeared in 'The Times' on February 7th. Headlined "E-Mail firms to charge for first-class delivery" it tells how AOL and Yahoo plan to charge companies who send emails to their users. Here's a direct quote from that article:

"It amounts to the creation of a two-tier Internet in which paid-for emails speed around the world, while ordinary consumers - barred from paying for messaging - have to endure late or lost mail as the price for a free service."

We think this is an appalling prospect. The majority of genealogy sites, including Rootsweb, offer a completely free service and couldn't afford to pay to send emails.

We agree that there's a problem with spam, but this heavy-handed solution is emphatically not the right answer. Are AOL really incapable of distinguishing between junk mail and genuine emails?

By the way, all of our automated emails are STILL being blocked by AOL. That means that members who use AOL don't receive their password immediately on signing up (we have to send it manually), nor can they receive password reminders.

The only way AOL will change their plans is if their own customers tell them what they think of them! So, if you are an AOL user, we hope you'll do just that.


End Quote

Regards

Clive

[Chasing Caseys]

By the way, all of our automated emails are STILL being blocked by AOL

I am with aol and my last newsletter from lost cousins was yesterday (26th Feb) so i dont know when the above will take effect. As for yahoo, i blocked all from that except for people i know (on my allowed list) as when i subscribed to Origins newsletter or what ever it is i got more spam than Tesco's. Somehow it is sent or connected through yahoo, cant remember exactly but aol have a very good spam filter and if i really want to know what the two sites are up to i will have to look at the web sites or look in the spam folder and decide if i want to accept a spam mail .


That means that members who use AOL don't receive their password immediately on signing up (we have to send it manually), nor can they receive password reminders.
Does that mean it just applies to new members ?


The only way AOL will change their plans is if their own customers tell them what they think of them! So, if you are an AOL user, we hope you'll do just that
I think most of us have done that since they changed the way they operate and it hasnt done much good yet !

When they start charging family/friends to email i will panic ;) or go back to paper and pen or even telephone |blush|

[Rod Neep]

One of the things that AOL users have never really realised, and it has been this way for years, is that there is a very large amount of genuine personal mail that they do not receive. The problem is, they don't know that they haven't received it, and so there is "no cause to be worried". |shakehead

Mailing system administrators know that it happens, because we see the rejected emails that AOL won't accept for their users!

Rod

[busyglen]

One of the things that AOL users have never really realised, and it has been this way for years, is that there is a very large amount of genuine personal mail that they do not receive. The problem is, they don't know that they haven't received it, and so there is "no cause to be worried". |shakehead

Mailing system administrators know that it happens, because we see the rejected emails that AOL won't accept for their users!

Rod

That's interesting!

I have been with AOL for about 5 years and have gone through all these infuriating changes with spam and the eventual filters. Yes...there have been a few times when I have been furious when I have had a problem and have gone around in circles trying to resolve it. But...having talked to friends who use other ISPs they don't seem to be any better/worse off.

Terry and Rod may remember that I had a problem just before the inception of this forum in that I couldn't receive any mail from the mailing lists. This I believe was down to AOL, and I never resolved the issue. So, yes I am aware that they caused problems. Without a survey of other ISP members' findings, I am unable to form an opinion of whether AOL is better/worse than any other, and have been loathe to change to another provider, who may, in essence, be no better than what I already have.

I have an Hotmail address which the majority of my friends/contacts know about and who use that if they cannot reach me. I get very few messages via this method, which leads me to believe that I am not missing hardly any mail. I receive most of the filtered mail into my spam folder, and delete that which I know is spam without opening it. Occasionally an email that is not spam turns up there, and I transfer it.

I don't like the idea that has been reported , that we shall soon have to pay for the emails on AOL, so I shall be interested in the eventual outcome.

Glenys

[MarkJ]

Hi Glenys :)
As far as I understand it, from other sources, the AOL idea is to charge commercial email senders - such as mailing lists etc. It won't affect "normal" users as far as charging is concerned (though it may well stop non-commercial mailing lists from being able to reach AOL customers, since they cannot afford to pay a fee per mail if they are non-commercial of course!). Your own mails - the ones you send out - will not be affected. That would simply kill AOL if they attempted to charge their users to send mails.
Having had dealings with AOL in the past over various things, I know that they *can* be made to see sense - certainly in the UK. You do tend to need to know *who* to contact though ;) Sadly, the majority of these ideas seem to come from the main AOL HQ in the States and the UK HQ has little control over them :(
Have you looked on AOLs message boards about this? There could well be some information there. Look in the ones related to Computing ( where there is likely to be more comprehension of what is going on).
Is AOL better or worse than other ISPs?
Well, that depends on what you want. I always found them very reliable from the connection point of view when I was on dial up. Their own peculiar portal method of connecting and dealing with mail suits some people - and it is very easy to follw. Many people dislike it though - and prefer a real email client.
I personally had no problem with AOL at all, apart from the fact they do not support my operating system at all - which was one of the reasons I changed.

Mark

[busyglen]

Hi Glenys :)
As far as I understand it, from other sources, the AOL idea is to charge commercial email senders - such as mailing lists etc. It won't affect "normal" users as far as charging is concerned (though it may well stop non-commercial mailing lists from being able to reach AOL customers, since they cannot afford to pay a fee per mail if they are non-commercial of course!). Your own mails - the ones you send out - will not be affected. That would simply kill AOL if they attempted to charge their users to send mails.

Mark

Hi Mark, :)

I couldn't see how AOL were going to charge its non-commercial customers, as you say, it would have a mass `walk out' which wouldn't be good for business!

But....I can see the problems for `Lists' and Forums'. It could possibly mean that AOL members would be excluded from receiving mail, but how they would be separated I haven't a clue. Personally, although I like to receive replies to my threads, I still visit the Forum every day, so would pick them up anyway.

Nothing is ever simple in this life is it? :(

Thanks for giving me a clearer picture.

Glenys

[MarkJ]

Hi Mark, :)

I can see the problems for `Lists' and Forums'. It could possibly mean that AOL members would be excluded from receiving mail, but how they would be separated I haven't a clue.
Glenys

Yep - thats the real problem. Non-commercial lists, forums etc would presumably be expected to pay per mail if they wished to deliver to AOL customers. Although AOL claim it is to reduce spam, it strikes me as being a money making exercise for AOL. After all, nearly all spam is sent from what are called zombie computers running open relays - so as far as AOL or any other ISP is concerned, that is a mail from a person rather than commercial mailing or spam. The usual spam filtering which many ISPs use would possibly pick up much of the spam sent in that way - but a lot still gets through as you will probably have noticed!
So AOL are simply trying to cash in on those who send bulk mail - such as mailing lists. Naughty to disguise it as a "spam prevention"!
It would be simply stopped by the AOL mail system. Its quite easy to determine if mail is from a mailing list- and I expect thats what AOL will look for.
I suppose for those AOL customers who wish to receive mail from lists, there are two actions I would take. One is to sign up to a webmail account with say Hotmail or another provider and use that for subscribing. The second would be to complain to AOL about the inconvenience to their customers. If they receive enough emails complaining, they *may* take note - but I wouldn't hold your breath!

Mark

[Chasing Caseys]

AOL users have never really realised, and it has been this way for years, is that there is a very large amount of genuine personal mail that they do not receive

Same can be said for other providers, BT and the like. How many people have sent an email to someone, asked if they got it and they said no ! Does that mean aol isnt sending mail either ;)
As for personal mail i speak to friends ect that send it and would know if i hadnt recieved something.
Sounds more like a commercial thing which i would be all for :) .

[Ladkyis]

AOL have the capability to prevent bulk mail getting through because this is what they already do!!! I am a list admin for a couple of mailing lists on Rootsweb - and have been since 1996 - and I have to cope with bounced messages every day and as a result I don't see many AOL subscribers on my lists because they just don't get the messages.

AOL subscribers don't know that AOL make excuses and deny that they are blocking rootsweb mail. they tell rootsweb that they have to comply with several conditions for the mail to get through and then still block it - and tell their subscribers that rootsweb won't comply and after at least ten years of struggle the situation has not changed

Ann

[Mythology]

It is not only stuff from mailing lists that AOL block. Of the major ISPs they are by far the worst for simply blocking all mail from any particular ISP - their thinking seems to be that because one customer of that ISP is sending spam, all customers of that ISP must be spammers. One ISP that I was with suffered this a number of times, and it usually took between ten days and a fortnight to get AOL to remove the block. During this time, unless the sender has other means of contact, they may be unaware that their mail has not been delivered, as in such cases AOL often don't actually bounce it, they just bin it all.

Other companies such as BT (and, notably, NTL) *do* sometimes lose mail, it's true - but this is usually down to equipment failure, incompetence or whatever, nobody's perfect. The difference with AOL is that, being a typical arrogant American corporation, they ignore internationally accepted standards, make their own rules which they seek to impose on the rest of the world, do not allow their customers to deal *entirely* with mail filtering themselves if they so wish, and *deliberately* lose mail which they, with their "Nanny AOL knows best" attitude, deem to be undesirable.

I will make an exception for a few friends, but as a general rule I will not send mail to AOL addresses. I am in the fortunate position that it is almost invariably the other person who wants the info, not me, so I can be as arrogant as AOL are and send one brief message on the lines of "if you want to hear any more from me, then give me a non-AOL e-mail address - I'm not spending an hour typing for it to end up in the bin because they don't like the attachment", and if the other person can't be bothered to set up a webmail account or an 0845 account with another ISP, that's their funeral.

Also, if, for example, there is a contact link on a web site, and I have some information that could be of use to the person but the contact is an AOL address, I won't bother.

[Chasing Caseys]

Hello Ann

I dont know if i am an exception but I ended up unsubscribing from Rootsweb, Origins ect BECAUSE of all the mail i was getting from them ;)


and tell their subscribers that rootsweb won't comply
I have never had a message like this either.

I agree aol are infuriating sometimes - has anyone ever tried to uninstall aol ? its impossible !
I also have a hotmail account but got fed up with using that due to it refusing to accept and open attachments and its snail pace.
Catch 22 and i suppose we speak as we find.

[Clive Blackaby]

Hi folks - I'm amazed at the amount of heat this has generated :)

If were thinking of changing my ISP to AOL I'd have just changed my mind.

May I share my experiences with you all?. I use Freeserve aka Wanadoo (yuk where do they get these names from - do they think all their customers are teeenies!!!)

Spam filtering is a bit crude, in that a small number of items get through that shouldn't, and some stuff (mainly genuine newsletters etc) gets trapped.

It's quite difficult to identify and block the small number of items they miss but you don't want, but most importantly you can see the stuff from senders that they have incorrectly identified as spammers, and let their items through, and you only have to do that once.

So far as I know they don't "bounce" anything they regard as "spam" back to the sender. I just wish they would give me the option to do that myself.

I guess I spend about 5 - 10 minutes per day checking my spam folder (about 100 assorted ads for various rather dubious goods and services) just to make sure no legitimate stuff has been trapped.

Yes, I resent having to do this, because the garbage mail is so easy to spot, but it is a small price to pay if the alternative is AOL's drastic dictatorial "nanny" approach.

Regards to all

Clive

[Mythology]

"So far as I know they don't "bounce" anything they regard as "spam" back to the sender. I just wish they would give me the option to do that myself."

Wandering off topic a little but, as you mentioned that aspect of things ...

Generally speaking, these days it's not a good idea to bounce spam anyway, as most spammers use fake addresses, so all you're doing is adding to the clutter on the wires.
I use Mailwasher, which has a bounce facility, but I never use this, and I did suggest to them that, useful as it was years ago when Mailwasher first came on the scene, it was maybe about time that this "feature" was removed.
They pointed out, quite rightly, that there are times when it *can* be useful - it's the quickest way of unsubscribing from lists which don't include an "unsubscribe" link in the mail but automatically unsubscribe you if they get a bounce, and their view is that the answer is to educate the users, not withdraw the feature. Personally, I think that's a bit optimistic, so we don't see eye to eye over that particular aspect, but I still like Mailwasher and continue to use it. :)

[MarkJ]

Like Myth, I would never bounce emails as spam. If they get a mail bounced back to them, the spammers simply add you to a CD of "live" email addresses and sell it on to their spamming chums. Likewise for anyone who may be fairly new to dealing with spammers - never, ever click an "unsubscribe" type link in a spam. That also simply lets the spammer know your email address is real - and thus valuable to them for selling to other spammers.
For the more technically minded - attempting to retaliate is also a bad idea. Most spam comes from open relays on unwitting users' machines. They are totally unaware that they are sending out spam by the bagfull. The best response to spam is to simply delete it unopened. If you know how ( and your email client does not send any sort of receipt to indicate you have opened the mail if that was coded into the mail - which I believe Outlook Express did, but it may be different now) then reading the headers can be interesting. If I suspect a mail is from an open relay on an innocent machine, I always inform their ISP so they can instruct the unwitting victim.

On the subject of ISP wars ;) , just to note that Wanadoo (Freeserve) also get their fair share of complaints. To be honest, all ISPs have their detractors and fans. I have used both Freeserve and AOL in the past - both were OK for me, but I have seen some real rants about both - and BT,Tiscali etc etc

The best ISP is the one which gives *you* value for money and does all you ask of it (and hopefully a little more). I need unmetered ADSL because I am a Linux developer - so I am regularly downloading huge files - hundreds of megabytes. So I have to choose carefully - many ISPs cap downloads.

If you want decent spam filtering, then I would not rely on the ISP - whoever you are with. There are good free spam filtering programs out there such as SpamAssassain and others. These will usually catch the ones your ISP misses and they can even be trained to the sort of junk which does sneak through.

[busyglen]

I agree with Mark....the best ISP is the one that you are happy with and which does what you want. I also agree that every ISP has it's problems..a friend of mine has Freeserve and has had loads of issues with spam and not just with AOL.

I can only speak as I find, and I only get an odd one or two slipping the net into my spam folder, and I delete them without opening them. I too would never reply back to an obvious spam message. To my knowledge, I have only had two `bounced' emails from friends, for many months. One tried again two days later and it arrived and the other used my Hotmail address to let me know. So....for the moment I'm keeping my fingers crossed that I haven't spoken too loudly, and all is going wrong from now on!! :eek:

Glenys

[BeeE586]

This has all become a bit technical for me, but I can report a current coincidence.

A while ago I posted a request for information and recieved a reply by Private Message from a fellow forum-member in Australia. We exchanged e-mail addresses and several e-mails both ways over the last few days without any trouble. Then I received another Private Message to say that an e-mail to me had bounced, now I have had two communications from the same member but with a HOTMAIL suffix.

Yes, I am with AOL and totally baffled, and I did get the Newsletter from Lost Cousins.

Eileen

[busyglen]

Eileen, it looks as if the person who had the `bounced' email changed to their Hotmail address in order to reach you, as AOL were obviously blocking the original address.

I have found blocking to be spasmodic from one particular person. I have a relative in Australia, and he had an email returned. He tried again several days later, and it reached me ok. That is why I set up an Hotmail address so that people could write to me there if they had problems.

If the person who changed to Hotmail tried again, it's quite possible that it would get through this time.

You're not alone....I'm not a technical person, but manage to suss things out if I take it one step at a time. :) AND a lot of help from my `friends'! ;)

Glenys

[Mythology]

"I received another Private Message to say that an e-mail to me had bounced, now I have had two communications from the same member but with a HOTMAIL suffix."

I take it that when you refer to the Hotmail suffix, you mean that the person sending the mail used a Hotmail address, and not that they sent it to a Hotmail address of yours which you'd given them as an alternative.

Assuming this to be so, I would deduce that your Australian contact is an intelligent person who, having sent a message via their normal ISP and getting it bounced, has thought "Oh ******, here we go, those ******s at AOL have blocked my ISP again - I will try sending it from my Hotmail account and see if that gets through", which it did.

That is part of the problem with AOL - they don't just block things based on the content and, as I mentioned above re an ISP that I used to be with, will sometimes block *anything* coming from a particular ISP just because one of that ISP's customers is sending out a load of spam.

The other part of the problem, which, while I agree that all ISPs have their good and bad points, and a "good" ISP for a low user like me at less than 3 GB per month would not, for instance, be a "good" ISP for somebody like MarkJ who is probably downloading massive Linux distros at regular intervals, is why I cannot agree that AOL are a "good" ISP for anyone except those who believe that ignorance is bliss, is that they do not give you, the paying customer, any choice in the matter. In general, other ISPs will usually block virus mails, but as far as spam is concerned, it is an option - if you'd rather not bother sorting it out yourself, fine, you can choose to use the ISPs automatic anti-spam services if they offer one. If you find that this results in lost mail, and they aren't sufficiently flexible to allow you to set the basic rules, you can change your mind and unsubscribe. With AOL, you are stuffed - you can set up additional filters, but you can't get rid of their automatic removal of what they decide is undesirable to start with.

Edit:
Apologies for duplication of Glenys's info - I type too slowly.

[busyglen]

Sorry Myth....we did it again! :(

Glenys

[Rod Neep]

Look... the problem works like this...

A spammer does not use a real email address. He FORGES a "from" address!

Now lets say that forged address is "from" someone at rootsweb.com or someone at british-genealogy.com or from xyz.com

AOL (and others) receive the spam.... lots and lots of them. Their computer "sees" where it apparently came from.

AOL then block all mail from that ISP. Even genuine mail. Furthermore, the poor AOL user doesn't even know that someone has been trying to contact them!
They do not know that AOL is blocking their genuine mail!

Another scenario... the AOL user writes to someone.... but never gets a reply. Who does he or she blame for not sending a reply?

Rod

[busyglen]

Just as a matter of interest Rod...I received the monthly reminder re: B-G ACDB password etc. this morning and have done so since I subscribed. So...at least one is getting through. ;) Not that it's any consolation! :(

Glenys

[BeeE586]

As a matter of interest, I also received the BG newsletter this morning.

Thank you for your input and explanations. The puzzling part is why, after having exchanged several e-mails, another e-mail to me was blocked from someone who is apparently a private person, not any sort of organisation or comapany. The message was repeated in Private Messages and I have checked it against my spamtrap index - there are no forbidden words, nor did it appear in the spam box. The suffix did apply to the sender, I have no Hotmail address, perhaps I should have one if some kind person will tell me how.

I have Googled Hotmail, and it immediately asks for a password which of course I do not have. I use this phrase a lot - Help Please.

Eileen

[busyglen]

As a matter of interest, I also received the BG newsletter this morning.

Thank you for your input and explanations. The puzzling part is why, after having exchanged several e-mails, another e-mail to me was blocked from someone who is apparently a private person, not any sort of organisation or comapany. The message was repeated in Private Messages and I have checked it against my spamtrap index - there are no forbidden words, nor did it appear in the spam box. The suffix did apply to the sender, I have no Hotmail address, perhaps I should have one if some kind person will tell me how.

I have Googled Hotmail, and it immediately asks for a password which of course I do not have. I use this phrase a lot - Help Please.

Eileen

Eileen, if you to the Hotmail site again and click on the sign up button (ignore the password section on the right) you will be directed to various options, the first of which is `free'. Just follow the instructions and set up a password and put in whatever email address name you wish to use. I have had mine for some time now, and the screens have changed but hope this is of some help. Shout if you have any problems. I just find it helpful to use if there are problems, and also handy to log into if you are away.

Regarding the AOL problems with your sender....it doesn't matter if they are private or not...it depends on the ISP that your friend is with and whether that particular ISP appears to be initiating a lot of spam mail. The emails are not viewed individually by AOL, they often get lumped in with perfectly `good' mail, hence the reason that some are ok and others not. As we use AOL, we either have to `go with it or change'. I just cannot face the upheaval of a change after several years, and having to sort out a new address. So....I'm sticking for the time being until such times as they cause me problems. At the moment...that is not evident.

Good luck. :)

Glenys

[Rod Neep]

As we use AOL, we either have to `go with it or change'. I just cannot face the upheaval of a change after several years, and having to sort out a new address. So....I'm sticking for the time being until such times as they cause me problems. At the moment...that is not evident.

Good luck. :)

Glenys
But therein is the catch 22. AOL users do not know when they do not receive all of their mail. That is why it is not evident to you. :mad:

[busyglen]

Rod, I hear what you are saying and I really do understand what you are trying to get across....I'm sorry that I'm making you mad....watch that blood pressure! ;)

Ok, as far as I am `aware', I am not missing any mail. Most of my contacts come either through the forum (no problem there as posting a message will sort that out), messages via GenesReunited, but I can pick them up as well. I also receive messages from my web site. Ok, here I could be missing something, but if anyone is searching for `Coastguards' they quite often pick up this forum, so could find me. With regards to family, friends etc. `most' have my Hotmail address as well, or in desperation can phone me, if it's in this country. Apart from that, I don't know where anyone else would get my address from in order to email me if they wanted to contact me. As I have said before....I get emails daily, I receive mail from the forum, I receive the Rootsweb weekly update, and I receive replies to outgoing emails. So, I'm sorry it makes you unhappy, and believe me I DO know what you are saying, but until something happens to infuriate me, or I am told that emails to me are constantly being bounced...I don't want to rock the boat. I have enough problems in other areas, without having to start a search for another `better' (if there is such a one) ISP and all that the change over entails.

As an afterthought....a friend of mine is on Freeserve, and has more trouble than I have ever had with bounced mail. And yes, she is looking to change her ISP, but....which to choose....I don't know of one that is trouble free, that she (or I for that matter) could afford.

I hope though that your message will get across to others not so stubborn as I! |cheers|

Glenys

[busyglen]

Well Rod, I guess it is time to eat humble pie! :(

This is the first time that I have been `aware' of a missing e-mail (at least I `think' it is missing).

I emailed you direct via the ACDB link on 27th May with a query and haven't had a reply. So, either you didn't receive it. Received it but haven't had time to reply. Or.....answered it and AOL haven't delivered!

Ok...I can hear you shouting `At last!!' :)

On another note, I read over the weekend that the UK arm of AOL is being put up for sale, so goodness knows what will happen then!!

Glenys