This makes me 😭
UPDATE: Thanks @nekusoul@lemmy.nekusoul.de for this update: The issue has now been commented on and was closed by the maintainer, where they explained why those blocks would be nonsense. But it appears the OP wants to still talk with maintainer privately about it.
If a website won’t allow me to register with my protonmail , I will just not used that website.
Yep.
I’ve already run into a few. I mentally thank them for preventing me from wasting my time and money with them.
Is this going to be the response every time this shit happens until we’re all just sitting on Lemmy twiddling our thumbs? The arrogance feels like it’s downplaying the seriousness of the problem, and it’s annoying to see it recited so much.
In a lot of cases, you may not have a choice of using the site or not. In cases where you do have a choice, eventually most if not all the alternatives can do the same shit if it becomes normalized.
API is letting these types of filter lists become shared easily, too. Sites may not even make a conscious decision to filter out proton, it may just happen because their filters are pulling from lists like this.
The problem is the trend. And try as you may, you can not fully escape that.
And since people won’t use the website, the website won’t use the list. So the list would be useless.
The maintainer seems to have followed the same interpretation, weighing legitimate use against spam use. This is the official response to the issue as of 8h ago:
Dear Contributors,
We value your suggestions for expanding our list of disposable email providers. Your input is crucial in enhancing our tool’s capabilities.
Decision on Gmail and ProtonMail Inclusion
After thorough evaluation, we have resolved not to include Gmail and ProtonMail in our list. Our rationale is based on the following technical and operational considerations:
1. **Reputation and Reliability** * **Gmail and ProtonMail**: Established, reputable providers with a high trust level for personal and professional communication. * **Distinction**: Unlike typical disposable email services, they offer long-term, reliable email solutions. 2. **Active Abuse and Spam Prevention Mechanisms** * **Effective Systems**: Both providers have robust mechanisms to detect and mitigate abuse and spam. * **Proactive Monitoring**: Ensures a secure email environment, reducing the prevalence of malicious activities. 3. **Commercial Intent of Typical Disposable Email Providers** * **Focus**: Targeting providers driven by ad revenue, facilitating spam/abuse. * **Gmail and ProtonMail's Model**: User-centric, not primarily ad-driven. 4. **Domain Limitations** * **Effectiveness**: Limited domain offerings by Gmail and ProtonMail make them less susceptible to misuse. * **Strategy**: Focusing on providers with extensive, rotating domain lists for more impactful filtering. 5. **Individual User Accountability** * **Accountability Measures**: Both services have mechanisms to penalize users violating terms, decreasing misuse risks.Summary and Next Steps
Including Gmail and ProtonMail does not align with our criteria for identifying disposable email services. Our aim is to target services significantly contributing to online spam and abuse, without impacting legitimate email services. We have reviewed your list and agree on adding some providers, like internxt.com (Reference). We will also incorporate the obvious choices from the tail of your list. We apologize for the delay in addressing this issue but intend to promptly resolve it by focusing on the most impactful additions.
