Gop Cries Censorship Over Spam Filters That Work
Posted4 months agoActive4 months ago
krebsonsecurity.comOtherstory
heatednegative
Debate
80/100
CensorshipSpam FilteringPolitical Bias
Key topics
Censorship
Spam Filtering
Political Bias
Republicans accuse email providers of censorship after their fundraising emails are flagged as spam, sparking debate about the role of spam filters and potential political bias.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Active discussionFirst comment
13m
Peak period
18
0-1h
Avg / period
3.8
Comment distribution23 data points
Loading chart...
Based on 23 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Sep 5, 2025 at 11:32 PM EDT
4 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Sep 5, 2025 at 11:45 PM EDT
13m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
18 comments in 0-1h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Sep 6, 2025 at 12:58 PM EDT
4 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45146375Type: storyLast synced: 11/20/2025, 12:47:39 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
One does have to wonder about their motives tho
And they know their claims are bullshit here. But they think making up some nonsense bullshit and crying about it will let them bully folks as they please.
So far there's been virtually no penalties for being a nasty vicious little cry-bully anywhere. It doesn't always work but theres never a penalty. Smao they they try again here.
I think this assumes that the "thing they're doing" makes sense in the first place, but afaik there's no guarantee of that.
The benefit of having a custom domain is that I provide distinct email aliases to each website, which I keep track of, so I know which website leaked an address (and I also see those email aliases in the failed login attempts to my mail servers).
That also allows me to severe my relationship with a website if they start spamming me, so that may also create a selection bias since I am unaffected by the sort of spam resulting from the same email address being leaked to data brokers and used for marketing, because I delete the alias at the first offense. So I get mostly hit by websites that got hacked.
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?
Your last two questions are obviously sarcastic to me, but your first two sentences send the opposite message.
Because if there were a large number of people who would be willing to donate, and the only reason they're not donating is that these emails are being sent to spam at elevated rates... that would kind of justify the administration targeting Google's spam filtering practices here, on grounds that Google's practices are having a material, negative impact on the democratic political process on a partisan basis, whether intentional or not, no?
The only winning move with governments fighting bullshit proxy wars on your platform is not to play.
Watch the bitchfit thrown then.
It's just not that interesting because it's such a partisan baseless claim.
ActBlue doesn’t send fundraising emails. Campaigns use other mass mailer tools to do that. ActBlue just processes the credit cards, and gives the campaigns links to forms to process the credit cards.
[1] https://krebsonsecurity.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/koli-...
[2] https://datavizcatalogue.com/
1 more comments available on Hacker News