That is really odd Bell, I only received 1 copy.
What are you talking about? Fire away JagPC!
I get two copies per newsletter. That's one too many
I get more than two copies per newsletter. One is more than enough
I'd like to opt out of the marketing stuff all together
I'm also back down from six to four copies again. Indeed, they do look better, although the "good morning" is off, but I can't take it as a good sign that the first revamp isn't to stop spamming. This is illegal guys, doesn't that bother you a tidbit more than looks?
Maybe since this is such an issue, that Jag can just make the Newsletter Downloadable through the website or forum. This way, people who want it can get it, and if they don't, they don't.
On one account from GMail, Google is soft failing SPF, calling it neutral.
Perhaps Windows live also checks SPF, who knows.Code:Delivered-To: xxxxxx @ gmail.com Received: by 10.223.77.78 with SMTP id f14cs258375fak; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 12:17:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.236.181.168 with SMTP id l28mr37415256yhm.53.1328041033823; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 12:17:13 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Received: from cluster.nocdirect.com (cluster.nocdirect.com. [126.96.36.199]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f32si914153ann.54.2012.01.31.12.17.13 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 31 Jan 2012 12:17:13 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 188.8.131.52 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of email@example.com) client-ip=184.108.40.206; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 220.127.116.11 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of firstname.lastname@example.org) email@example.com Received: (qmail 11855 invoked by uid 48); 31 Jan 2012 15:17:12 -0500
I'm guessing you ought to have a very valid SPF record for your mass mailing server.
On the other account that is hosted at JPC, Spam Assassin Scores the email 3.8 - 1.0 for all trusted handovers. Bayes scores the email with 40-60% probability of being SPAM.
You should address those concerns and perhaps send a test email to one of your own servers to see what Spam Assassin thinks before sending them out en masse. Unfortunately I can't tell what Bayes sees as an issue, perhaps a return address of "sales@" is a trigger, perhaps fixing the things that SA is worried about might help fix both Bayes and Microsoft Live Mail.Code:Content analysis details: (2.8 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.8 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60% [score: 0.5000] 0.7 MIME_HTML_ONLY BODY: Message only has text/html MIME parts 0.4 HTML_MIME_NO_HTML_TAG HTML-only message, but there is no HTML tag 1.9 MISSING_MIMEOLE Message has X-MSMail-Priority, but no X-MimeOLE 0.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
I know I can authorize you as a safe sender, but that's not what you want; you want your emails not to be screened out by the SPAM proggies of people who haven't whitelisted ya.
You'll be pleased that today I again received two copies of the latest newsletter. To each of my registered email addresses. That's four copies.
Thank you, I've read each of them clearly.
I look forward to your response, no doubt to tell me again that you're moving forward.
Thanks for letting me know Bell thorpe. As you may already know our new JaguarPC Portal has entered the beta testing period. Once it is deployed you should begin to receive only one newsletter per mail out. So sorry again about the redundancy.