Tuta are a privacy focussed and pretty responsible mail service. They have quite strict sending limits to dissuade bulk mailers and keep the service free for those who need it.

Whatever the cause, I’d be surprised if bad mail is sent in enough volumes to be noticeable to MS

i installed MIAB like 3 years ago. had this exact same problem with outlook at the time. did the same and never have had any more problems.

last year i helped someone install miab and somehow neither gmail nor outlook nor any "major" provider logged them as spam from the get go. i was truly impressed and surprised.

i have heard war stories about people self hosting email and having problems. sure 3-5-10 years ago that might have been the case but not now for the most part.

please give your self hosted email a try again. it will take you less time to set everything up than cooking dinner. try using miab or similar email software.

go cheap, like racknerd or something and save money from vultr/DO.

> But I remember them having done funny things like banning the complete German Hetzner IP range because Hetzner didn't want to give them customers information without an curt order (which I guess Hetzner isn't allowed to do either iff the customer(s) in question is a private customer...).

All companies cover by GDPR (or similar privacy laws) would have this requirement. Can't be handling out information on customers to random companies willynilly.

I worked for a company that sent travel deals newsletters everyday. Deliverability to (then) Hotmail was abysmal.

We then got the recommendation of a company (cannot remember their name) that could analyse our IPs and give recommendations. Naturally, the recommendations were the ones that you could find everywhere so they were not useful, but the company did have access to MSFT's score of our IPs, so we could know when we were close to being blacklisted and could take action/ramp down/etc. How did they have access to those internal IP scores? I don't know, but it seems totally fishy :).

For sure we spent 5k+ USD yearly in this service (which is a huge amount of money in a 3rd. world country), and "somehow" after paying our deliverability did improve, despite doing the same things as before, as the recommendations were not ingenious.

So yeah, e-mail deliverability is a mafia, for sure.

Same experience. Thankfully I am in a position where I can just tell Microsoft mail users use a different provider or pound sand.

What whitelist are you referring to?

> They are blocking the whole ip-range of my provider.

That's not necessarily unreasonable, depending on which provider that is.

Sites like Wikipedia also block entire ranges to prevent spam. Unfortunately sometimes people do get caught up in that (as I did last year).

What third party?

I would assume any provider that allows you to send email also allows a great deal of spam, so this might not be unwarranted. My provider is also frequently blacklisted, I just don't use it to send mail anymore.

Even if the unsubscribe link works I still report spam as spam. If it is unsolicited then it is spam, plain and simple.

It is good practise. You should never use the unsubscribe function as it tells sender the account receives is actually in use and valid. Thus they will sell your email to even more spammers.

> or even if it takes too long to load

Which is not ideal, and might explain why Gmail routinely puts perfectly legit correspondence in my spam folder - again and again.

I realize this might well be a problem stemming from email clients having but one option to flag emails: spam. Ideally one should have more options - as it is scamming, spoofing and innocuous unsolicited marketing (and slow loading messages it seems) are all put in the same basket.

That actually should be illegal practice. But it is very unlikely regulators will ever catch up with that.

It's better for governments to have just a few big email providers, so authorities have easier life if they need to snoop on someone.

Been there, done that. This is be a nightmare, mainly for back scatter from spam runs.

You can’t control who sends email that looks like it’s from you. If your email were bounced because of a spf or dkim failure, you could get an unlimited number of emails.

How is legislation the only answer? Users can just stop using Outlookif they care that MS is blocking providers. If users don't care and stay on Outlook, why bother legislating it?

Putting on my "postmaster at shared hosting company" hat: Used to be. Gmail is done lot of work to be worse than Outlook. At least MS idiosyncraties are somewhat known and stable. I would say that most customer complaints are related to gmail.

Love mailcow I moved off exchange to mailcow. I’ve used email for I guess 30 years now and every year it’s less reliable. My kids do not use email at all , they are on the internet with out actually using email. Sure they have a google account for YouTube but their services tend to allow a sign up with out an email. I can see a future where it continues to be less of a thing and turn into something held on by older people.

Something like Delta Chat?

Worse, too many emails don't even get delived to Spam by Microsoft. Being able to tell people to check their spam folder would be a blessing.

Because WAY too many people use the “Report Spam” button on emails that are not actually “spam”. Gmail has the exact same problem.

Ugh, we contacted Chase since we were going on an 'out-of-the-ordinary' road trip.spoke with fraud dept and gave them our travel itinerary, hoping to prevent cards from being frozen while we were in questionable cell coverage areas.

Everything went fine until the last gas stop before arriving to our destination... only to find our cards frozen anyhow.

It took about 25 mins to get cleared up, but these big corps are so heavily dependent on automation, they can't deviate because the system will take its own actions anyhow.

I, for one, am tired of living in a society that somehow isn't able to routinely think/behave proactively rather than reacting only once "the system will let you".

Outlook are a pain. If you don't regularly send email to outlook.com they forget your IP and start responding with 550s.

I have a daily message sent out from my server to a test account at outlook.com for two reasons: to try to work around this behaviour and to know immediately when there is a delivery issue.

The sad part is that this kind of behavior might actually be optimal for Microsoft. Most people won't even see the issue (as senders work around it) or blame the sender wheres they will start screeching if they so much as have to see a spam mail once in a while.

> If even their most basic tier only cost a few quid a year, it would probably stop spam usage by 99%

Not really; they will just sign up. Probably using a stolen card (I assume? I have no way to check.)

Source: have worked for email provider. Have you seen one of those films where one guy fends off hordes of zombies or other "bad guys"? It's like that. Anything that can send email will attract hordes of twats trying to spam the shit out of it. The main difference is that the spammers are more despicable subhuman twats.

Are you saying this does not apply for free Gmail or Outlook as well? Because those should be then blocked too.

my money is on the side that there's no team looking into those email lists actively.

I think this is it, too. AI is efficient, but malfunctioning a fair percentage of the time. Are we going to have to accept it just because it has a number of upsides - or are we to demand that errors be brought to 0 before using it on critical systems, like email? Or in critical situations like war for that matter.

The vast majority of spam these days now originates from Outlook and Gmail accounts.

Yet, nobody has the power or would dare to block them. This is not so black and white as you say.