<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Icesave customers - Don&#039;t let the spam filters scuttle your compensation claim!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://community.plus.net/blog/2008/11/12/icesave-customers-dont-let-the-spam-filters-scuttle-your-compensation-claim/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://community.plus.net/blog/2008/11/12/icesave-customers-dont-let-the-spam-filters-scuttle-your-compensation-claim/</link>
	<description>News and Updates on the Community.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 10:19:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Bob Pullen</title>
		<link>http://community.plus.net/blog/2008/11/12/icesave-customers-dont-let-the-spam-filters-scuttle-your-compensation-claim/comment-page-1/#comment-7724</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob Pullen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Nov 2008 17:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://community.plus.net/?p=12991#comment-7724</guid>
		<description>Whilst I can understand where you&#039;re coming from Steve, I don&#039;t think there would have been an awful amount of merit in us contacting the FSCS.

As I mentioned in my post, Postini is very much a proprietary solution and we have little influence over it&#039;s spam filtering heuristics. We could globally whitelist the fscs domain but that&#039;s a bit of a dirty solution to the problem in all honesty.

I&#039;m very much of the opinion that it&#039;s the sender&#039;s responsibility to ensure that their emails don&#039;t fall foul of popular spam filtering mechanics.

Sorry if you feel like we let you down on this occasion though :(</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whilst I can understand where you're coming from Steve, I don't think there would have been an awful amount of merit in us contacting the FSCS.</p>
<p>As I mentioned in my post, Postini is very much a proprietary solution and we have little influence over it's spam filtering heuristics. We could globally whitelist the fscs domain but that's a bit of a dirty solution to the problem in all honesty.</p>
<p>I'm very much of the opinion that it's the sender's responsibility to ensure that their emails don't fall foul of popular spam filtering mechanics.</p>
<p>Sorry if you feel like we let you down on this occasion though <img src='http://community.plus.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':(' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve</title>
		<link>http://community.plus.net/blog/2008/11/12/icesave-customers-dont-let-the-spam-filters-scuttle-your-compensation-claim/comment-page-1/#comment-7707</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Nov 2008 21:24:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://community.plus.net/?p=12991#comment-7707</guid>
		<description>I alerted PlusNet to the problem of the blocked FSCS icesave emails through a member question to the PlusNet help team back on 6/11/08. I suggested PlusNet contact FSCS to sort out the problem but you refused to do so. So it is not just a case that FSCS has not contacted PlusNet, it is also the case that PlusNet have made no attempt to contact the FSCS. 

I accept that the way that FSCS sent out the emails was completely flawed.

I think PlusNet is a great ISP and I can&#039;t see myself switching elsewhere. But on this occasion I was a bit disappointed that PlusNet did not proactively respond to the issue when it arose given the importance of these emails.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I alerted PlusNet to the problem of the blocked FSCS icesave emails through a member question to the PlusNet help team back on 6/11/08. I suggested PlusNet contact FSCS to sort out the problem but you refused to do so. So it is not just a case that FSCS has not contacted PlusNet, it is also the case that PlusNet have made no attempt to contact the FSCS. </p>
<p>I accept that the way that FSCS sent out the emails was completely flawed.</p>
<p>I think PlusNet is a great ISP and I can't see myself switching elsewhere. But on this occasion I was a bit disappointed that PlusNet did not proactively respond to the issue when it arose given the importance of these emails.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
