[sour-taste]

Even baseless accusations like this are likely to lead to capitulation by companies out of fear of reprisal from the rest of the trump administration. We can look forward to explicitly allowlisted winred advertising from here on out I'm sure.

[Jcampuzano2]

This is the entire point. They 100% know what they're doing here. They will always just blame everyone else for their incompetency

[amarant]

If they 100% know what they're doing, it's not incompetence, by definition.

One does have to wonder about their motives tho

[Spivak]

It feels like companies aren't being petty enough when it comes to governments mucking in their operations. "You're right, we don't want to appear to be participating in favoritism, our policy going forward will be to block all emails of a political nature by default. Users interested in seeing these messages can re-enable them in settings."

The only winning move with governments fighting bullshit proxy wars on your platform is not to play.

[Jcampuzano2]

I wish they'd go lower. We are a capitalistic system right? So what they should simply say is that "Our metrics showed our revenue, user retention, and usage numbers were shown to be higher when we blocked this right wing donor spam and content and we have a fiduciary duty to our shareholders". And as a private company their First amendment right allows them to do so.

Watch the bitchfit thrown then.

[anonym29]

What difference will this make though?

People who aren't interested will unsubscribe or manually mark as spam.

People who are interested and willing to donate were already receiving the emails and donating anyway, right?

It's not like there's a big group of people who would donate, but who are not technically literate enough to check their spam folder, right?

[raincole]

Are you being sarcastic or not?

Your last two questions are obviously sarcastic to me, but your first two sentences send the opposite message.

[cm2187]

If that means I can send a regular email to a gmail address from my own custom domain without being systematically classified as spam, I will take the win. Next win would be for gmail to police their own spamming activity. The gmail domain is the single largest source of spam I receive.

[mindslight]

You seem to still be operating with an idea that general principles matter here, as opposed to merely naked authoritarian power. Is your "own custom domain" winred.com, or do you otherwise have the ear of one of the anti-American butchers currently defiling the White House? If not, then no.

[zrobotics]

Clarification question, since I'm curious. I don't believe I've ever received a spam message from a Gmail domain on any of my email addresses, some of which are posted publicly ([e-mail] addresses for businesses). I do see lots of phishing attempts from Gmail addresses attempting to impersonate Facebook ad support and similar types of very loosely targeted low-effort phishing. Am I an outlier, or are you seeing actual spam coming from Gmail addresses? To be clear, I'm calling spam unrequested marketing and nigerien prince type scams. I'm just curious, since that doesn't align with my experience at all.

[lokar]

It won’t

[kylehotchkiss]

People will flee the platform if they’re forced to swim through spammy winred emails. A new email provider will crop up that uses personalized AI model instead of global spam lists which will accomplish the same thing but can attribute the spam flag as a users preference ¯\_(ツ)_/¯