[HN Gopher] Emails to Outlook.com rejected due to a fault or ove...
___________________________________________________________________
Emails to Outlook.com rejected due to a fault or overzealous
blocking rules
Author : Bender
Score : 128 points
Date : 2026-03-04 11:33 UTC (11 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.theregister.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.theregister.com)
| TonyTrapp wrote:
| I've had this exact problem for years. My IP addresses have been
| used for 15+ years for sending e-mail, they are spam-free, but
| Microsoft keeps blocking them. Every two months or so I have to
| ask them to unblock the IP again, then I can send mails to
| Outlook again, until they just random decide to block me again.
| It's an absolute clown show.
| lucasfin000 wrote:
| This is the price every small sender pays. The unblock request
| process is essentially designed to make you give up or move to
| a large ESP. There's no appeals process, no SLA, no
| acknowledgment that your reputation data might just be wrong.
| You're at the mercy of a system that treats false positives as
| acceptable damage.
| Alifatisk wrote:
| I created my first Outlook account when I was young. Now, 30
| years later and its still my primary account. I can't imagine how
| I would migrate to another email address if Microslop would begin
| ruining Outlook by forced subscription or something. My digital
| life is in M$ hands at the moment.
| eviks wrote:
| You could start the process now, before the ruin?
| butILoveLife wrote:
| I learned this lesson the hard way with OneDrive.
|
| Now I only use Windows for legacy software that my customers
| force on me.
|
| Fedora has not just been liberating, but jaw dropping. I
| actually felt offended that I had wasted so much time on
| debian-family/ubuntu/mint and windows.
| BLKNSLVR wrote:
| OneDrive was born enshittified.
|
| The concept, way back when, was great. I tried to use it, by
| a previous name, for replicating / distributing data backups
| and it always worked great... for a few days, maybe weeks.
| And then something unrecoverable went wrong, and I had to re-
| set it up essentially from scratch and it worked great... for
| a few days, maybe weeks. And then something unrecoverable
| went wrong.
|
| In the intervening 15+ years, OneDrive has never made my
| experience of computing better. It has only ever nagged,
| slowed, and failed. And that was before Microslop went down
| the x% AI coding path.
| pluralmonad wrote:
| I personally like when you open any office doc, do nothing
| to it before closing and you get the scary warning asking
| if you want to save your document (to onedrive) implying
| all is lost if you select no. I am sure millions of tech
| unsavvy people have been conned into sending their data to
| Bill Gates.
| nicbou wrote:
| I would start migrating to an email domain that you control. It
| will come useful at one point or another.
| josephg wrote:
| Yep this. I migrated from Gmail to my own domain years ago.
| It was painful. Weirdly enough, I think the longest holdouts
| were my parents, who were still sending email to my Gmail
| account a decade after I stopped using the address.
|
| I moved my email to Fastmail, and I've been very happy ever
| since. But now that I own the domain, moving to a different
| provider - if I ever need to - would be trivial.
| ohyoutravel wrote:
| I moved to Fastmail, set it up with Gmail so I received
| forwarded emails. Years later there's still a long tail of
| senders using my Gmail, but I get the emails forwarded, and
| only actually log in to Gmail every six months or so.
| wccrawford wrote:
| It feels like there's quite a lot of spin on this. There's no
| hint as to how many users were actually affected. It only really
| seems to mention Estonia, and probably only a region of it.
|
| The ISP there _claims_ they haven 't received any reports of
| SPAM. But that sounds wrong. _No_ reports probably means your
| reporting system is broken.
|
| So putting that together, it seems like a small ISP screwed up
| and let spammers go wild, and Outlook blocked them for it. I
| can't really fault Outlook for that.
| shevy-java wrote:
| > There's no hint as to how many users were actually affected.
|
| How many users would you see as the threshold then?
|
| Since you stated that there is a spin to this, how many users
| would go over your defined threshold level?
| cromulent wrote:
| The article has hyperlinks in it, e.g. to this:
|
| https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/5786144/...
|
| which comes from an ESP serving millions of users.
| thedanbob wrote:
| My org (USA) was affected. I wasn't the primary person dealing
| with it, but from what I gather one user marked one of our
| emails as junk, and then suddenly all of our emails to Outlook
| users started getting blocked.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| Someone recently leveraged some kind of automated spam attack
| against my domain using Zendesk's email servers. For some
| reason, Zendesk doesn't enforce SPF and DKIM checks when
| opening new tickets, so I got flooded with "your new account
| has been registered" and "thank you for filing a ticket"
| emails.
|
| I blocked off Zendesk entirely because they didn't fix their
| shitty email system. The other newsletter mail services
| (mailgun/sendgrid/etc.) are just as bad for this.
|
| There are plenty of reasons why large email senders could (and
| should) be on reputation blacklists. None of these email
| delivery companies seem to care very much about the spam they
| send until shit hits the fan, and now that it did it seems
| everyone blames the people maintaining the blacklists.
| jamespo wrote:
| This was widespread, I was also affected. I think you can
| create spoof tickets / accounts over Https with no
| verification and zendesk don't want to do anything which adds
| friction.
| shiftpgdn wrote:
| This is an extremely widespread issue. I send close to a
| million emails per month across dozens of different providers
| (all newsletters.) These are all from high reputation domains
| and email accounts. We are completely unable to make anything
| happen with Microslop. It is infuriating.
| dqv wrote:
| Your intuition is way off, like dangerously off. But your
| comment is a great example to show a smug lawyer at Microsoft
| when they try to say there is no basis for the claim that these
| blocks against legitimate senders are defamatory.
|
| This has been affecting reputable senders who take spam
| reporting seriously, including MXRoute and Discourse.
|
| > No reports probably means your reporting system is broken.
|
| "No reports" can mean a lot of things. There is no "probably".
|
| The "you" in "your" is Microsoft because under a certain volume
| of email, they don't even send reports. I regularly test the
| abuse contact address for my server because of this exact
| unfair assumption - that it must be my fault. I have never once
| gotten an abuse report notification from Microsoft, but I have
| gotten a bounce message saying that I'm blocked because I
| apparently send spam! Btw, this was _in reply to an email from
| a Microsoft user_.
|
| Worse, I figured I'd just disallow any email from a Microsoft
| property - if an outlook (or hotmail or live or anyone else)
| sends an email, I can just bounce it and tell them to use a
| different service to reach me since I can't reply. Nope!
| Microsoft won't surface the bounce message to the user.
|
| So, I am barred from replying to Microsoft emails. I am also
| barred from informing the sender that their email won't reach
| me.
|
| It's defamation - the sender is always going to assume that it
| is my fault if I didn't reply even if the reason I "didn't
| reply" is outside of my control.
|
| > So putting that together, it seems like a small ISP screwed
| up and let spammers go wild, and Outlook blocked them for it. I
| can't really fault Outlook for that.
|
| Yes, in your imagined scenario, you can't really fault outlook.
| In the real world, however, outlook is very much to blame.
| chao- wrote:
| One IP address (exclusively ours) among our email IPs at my
| place of employment was affected. We have used that IP for nine
| years. Emails are strictly transactional (receipts, password
| resets, et cetera).
|
| The "rate limiting" started two weeks ago, giving us a code
| that Microsoft's documentation doesn't even list. It remains
| unresolved. Never had critical issues like this on our
| transactional IPs prior to this, and this particular IP address
| is still delivering just fine to other consumer and corporate
| email systems.
| gzread wrote:
| Everyone who runs an email server knows Microslop doesn't care
| about receiving its customer's emails. The best thing you can do
| is migrate away.
| miohtama wrote:
| No worries. If you migrate your email server to Azure(TM) the
| delivery is guaranteed.
| kijin wrote:
| Keep a few throwaway Hotmail/Outlook addresses in your password
| manager, in case you need to use a Windows PC that demands a
| Microslop account. That's about the end of their usefulness.
|
| Just like Internet Explorer used to be the program you used
| once -- and only once -- to download a proper browser.
| mono442 wrote:
| It's has been like this for a long time. For me hotmail is
| unusable because some emails just never arrive due to their spam
| filtering.
| dismalpedigree wrote:
| I'm guessing they connected CoPilot to the inbound filter and it
| is doing stupid and unexpected things.
| mmsc wrote:
| I wonder if Microsoft actually likes running their free email
| service still. They wiped a ton of old Hotmail and Live.com
| emails some years ago (and then allowed new people to register
| those deleted names). I imagine they don't get much out of it
| anymore.
| ohyoutravel wrote:
| They wiped all the emails from my 25 year old Hotmail account.
| Pretty weak. I refuse to use Microsoft products except if
| forced, and do my best to evangelize this position.
| expedition32 wrote:
| Most people will never pay for email service. Which leaves
| you Google, MS or god forbid your own ISP.
| simonw wrote:
| I wonder how many accounts on other services were then hijacked
| using "forgot my password" attacks.
|
| UPDATE: After a bit of digging it looks like they started the
| username recycling policy in 2013, may have quietly stopped
| doing that in 2018 but formalized no longer doing that in 2021:
| https://web.archive.org/web/20230627104616/https://www.micro...
|
| "Summary of changes to the Microsoft Services Agreement - June
| 15, 2021 [...] In the Outlook and Office Services sections,
| we've removed the Outlook.com section to clarify that an email
| address or username is not recycled into our system or assigned
| to another user."
| deltoidmaximus wrote:
| It's wild to me they ever started doing this in the first
| place. And in 2013 no less, it isn't like the hijacking risk
| was some far off concept at that point.
| mrweasel wrote:
| It's certainly not free to run and maybe it doesn't really make
| sense for Microsoft to run Outlook.com anymore, except that
| it's an easy way to motivate people to having a Microsoft
| account.
|
| Outlook.com certainly has to show up as an expense, one that
| Microsoft would like to reduce. When you look at what other
| providers charge for a single email account, it's hard to see
| Microsoft making money of Outlook.com. There's obviously
| something to be said for scale, but still, it must cost them
| something.
| john_strinlai wrote:
| > _It 's certainly not free to run and maybe it doesn't
| really make sense for Microsoft to run Outlook.com anymore,
| except that it's an easy way to motivate people to having a
| Microsoft account._
|
| it also funnels people into using exchange for work. more
| like a "marketing expense".
| vladvasiliu wrote:
| > it's an easy way to motivate people to having a Microsoft
| account.
|
| Can you actually use a non-outlook account for windows? Or
| are you talking about a different kind of "ms account"?
| arend321 wrote:
| I'm in the privileged position to advise clients to move away
| from hotmail/live if they want uninterrupted email delivery.
| joshstrange wrote:
| Just had a friend reach out yesterday about this issue. His
| outlook account for 10+ years started having issues receiving
| emails from his dad and a company he works with.
|
| All I could find was that his dad's email was missing SPF/DMARC
| but the other email address that was having problems looked like
| it was configured correctly.
|
| I only was able to get a screenshot of the email voice his dad
| received and it mentioned being on a block list (like in the
| article).
| boesboes wrote:
| I've stopped diagnosing outlook/hotmail/live delivery issues
| about 12 years go, they simply do not give a single fuck about
| their customers. It used to be different, about 18 years ago
| orso, they had ways to contact them and resolve such issue.
|
| fuck big tech :)
| Ensorceled wrote:
| My clients have been experiencing this forever; the logs SAY
| "temporarily rate limited due to IP reputation." but really the
| emails are never going to get delivered. I have to get MailChimp
| or Mailgun to rotate the IPs.
|
| It looks like all it takes is one person to mark your email as
| spam, even by accident. Note that these are mailing lists which
| they signed up for in MailChimp case OR transactional emails in
| the Mailgun case.
|
| It's only hotmail/outlook that we constantly have this issue
| with, Google etc. are all fine.
| scandox wrote:
| Often these "spam" reports by end users are just accidental
| clicks as well. Many of the abuse reports we get are like an
| email from someone's Mum and visibly legitimate. At other times
| there are users who use the Report Spam function as a kind of
| inbox management tool - a way of moving mail away so they don't
| have to see it because Trash or Delete or whatever is just
| further away from their pointer.
| pluralmonad wrote:
| I tell my friends and family to never click unsubscribe
| links, unless they had proactively subscribed. Buying
| something from a company that requires an email does not
| count. unsolicited marketing emails are spam and should be
| treated as such. Double so if that company sends marketing
| emails disguised behind support@company.com.
| iamacyborg wrote:
| > Double so if that company sends marketing emails
| disguised behind support@company.com
|
| That's typically not a disguise but a clear means of
| indicating that you can reply to the email
| pluralmonad wrote:
| No, sending marketing from support emails is almost
| certainly trying to game spam filters.
| Marketing@company.com would work for the allow replies
| purpose.
| iamacyborg wrote:
| > sending marketing from support emails is almost
| certainly trying to game spam filters
|
| That is not how spam filters work.
| pluralmonad wrote:
| If I've interacted with a specific email address, like
| support@company.com, my email provider will put them in
| my inbox.
| ycombinatrix wrote:
| How is it not a disguise? It means you can't block
| marketing emails without also blocking the legitimate
| support emails.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| "Report spam" is quicker and easier than "unsubscribe".
|
| Gmail added a popup asking the user if they want to
| unsubscribe when flagging a newsletter with the appropriate
| unsubscribe headers, so it must be common enough to warrant
| Gmail developer attention.
| Ensorceled wrote:
| > Gmail added a popup asking the user if they want to
| unsubscribe when flagging a newsletter with the appropriate
| unsubscribe headers
|
| Unfortunately close to 100% of the spam I'm flagging causes
| this popup now :-/
|
| I'm getting a dozen spam a day now on my Gmail account ...
| I think they're losing the battle.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| Does gmail still insert ads in the free tier? That would be
| a reason to keep people reading as many emails as possible.
| sumtechguy wrote:
| Pretty sure hotmail/outlook also has the same sort of popup
| for spam reports. I think accidental would be kind of hard
| with that popup.
| Arainach wrote:
| Agreed. I was an early outlook.com user (was working at MS when
| it launched, I think internal users got slightly early access
| allowing me to claim a nicer name than my Gmail) but despite
| having well over a decade of accounts tied to it got so angry
| at certain messages never appearing that a couple of years ago
| I reversed the flow of forwarding and swapped to another
| account as my primary.
|
| Sounds like it's gotten even worse.
| jonathanlydall wrote:
| I always thought of outlook.com as a rebranding of Hotmail
| (which itself had been continually evolving, was probably
| actually "Live" at that point), I would expect it is the same
| (ever evolving) infrastructure.
|
| In which case, people like me with an @hotmail.com address
| from the 90's were much earlier users of the outlook.com
| email boxes than when the domain was "launched" by Microsoft.
| Markoff wrote:
| As long term Outlook.com user all I can say it's their service is
| extremely unreliable, my emails are either not delivered at all
| or end up in junk mail, some emails I don't receive at all or my
| partners are rate limited sometimes receiving their emails with
| hours long delays.
|
| I assume also their junk filters block some emails and there is
| no way to avoid it, you repeatedly add senders to safe senders
| list, even to safe subscriptions and their email still end up
| marked as junk even after years long communication from same
| addresses.
|
| As backup when something important I write email to recipient
| from gmail whether they received my email from outlook only to
| find out my email was never received.
| gus_massa wrote:
| A few years ago, in my university we have a big problem at the
| beginning of the semester to contact ~10K students, in particular
| when they register to our Moodle platform and the server sends
| them a message.
|
| Gmail was usually ok.
|
| Yahoo had some max messages per day.
|
| But Hotmail/Live/Outlook/whatever just made the messages
| disappear, no spam folder, no bounce, just disappear. We had some
| success telling the students to send us a message from their
| Hotmail/Live/Outlook/whatever address half an hour before
| registration. This adds our address to some special secret list
| for that account, and our later messages (usually) reach them.
| (It may fail. It may fail. IWOMM. YMMV.)
| CrzyLngPwd wrote:
| It's not just Outlook, it's all MS email products as well as
| Yahoo.
|
| These are emails that our customers have specifically requested
| and we get support tickets blaming us.
|
| It's been like this for years.
| iamcalledrob wrote:
| I was unable to reach a business this week who host their email
| on Office 365. Any email I sent would bounce with:
| 550 5.7.520 Message blocked because it contains content
| identified as spam. AS(4810)'
|
| For context, I was replying to an existing and very mundane email
| thread.
|
| Something is rotten in the state of Outlook
| spogbiper wrote:
| outlook.com and Office 365 are very different beasts. with the
| latter problems are more often something (mis)configured by the
| customer/administrator of the 365 account rather than microsoft
| themselves, and there are steps the customer can take to work
| around the issue. With outlook.com there is nothing the
| recipient can do.
| rbc wrote:
| This is one of those articles that demonstrates why email should
| be distributed. Letting Google and Microsoft run email for the
| planet is just asking for problems. There are some technical
| demands to running email services, but they are still in reach of
| the technically inclined individual or organization. If for no
| other reason, it would help keep the big mail service providers
| honest.
| cute_boi wrote:
| microslop should start focusing on real world problem than
| overhyped ai bubble.
| zelphirkalt wrote:
| It is my experience, that Outlook is not a reliable e-mail
| service. Sometimes e-mails are not delivered, or only delivered
| hours later. When they are delivered, even as a paying customer,
| they are downloaded so slowly, that I had to wait 10 minutes to
| get all my e-mails, while my 1 EUR per month Posteo provider
| delivers in seconds.
|
| My impression is, that the only reason one would want to have MS
| as a mail provider is, that they are entrenched in the e-mail
| provider reputation and delivery game. Other than that, it seems
| to be an all around bad service. Not even talking about the mail
| client itself.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| The big reason is enterprises buy into O365 and running their
| email through Outlook instead of on-prem or at another provider
| is part of that. For the same reason they use Teams over Zoom
| or Slack or other alternatives.
| lousken wrote:
| I was using outlook for communicating with businesses as it is
| often what they use. Some of them just could not send a response
| back to me, so I am not using outlook anymore. Just normal
| Microslop stuff
| bradleyy wrote:
| Having to explain to customers that they didn't receive an email
| because Outlook has a multi-stage set of email servers and the
| inside ones reject due to the edge (antispam) servers is always
| interesting.
| ycombinatornews wrote:
| Very happy I decided to ditch outlook (and did it) this year
| after 10+ years. Every other year some part of the system would
| break, deliverability, authentication or 2FA. More ads, less
| value.
|
| Eh. Another product driven into ground by Microslop
| whalesalad wrote:
| Days since last Microsoft fuckup: 0 (hard-coded)
| tredre3 wrote:
| BTW your domain is missing SPF and DMARC records.
| crimsonnoodle58 wrote:
| We experienced this exact error this week. Only affected
| outlook.com users, and not 365 users. Had to supply MS support
| with proof of ownership of the IP. The whole process took about a
| week to resolve.
| VladVladikoff wrote:
| This has plagued us for years. We send quite a lot of
| transactional email (about 150k emails per day), and there have
| been several times where Microsoft blocked our server. Usually it
| is because Microsoft has banned an entire netblock, that our
| server just happens to be sitting in. I have seen them do this to
| IPs fro Hetzner, Linode, Amazon AWS (SES), etc. And yeah we've
| signed up for their junk mail reporting service, and we have all
| our DNS records dialed in perfectly.
|
| I even went as far as signing up for Azure, in the hopes that if
| I sent from a Microsoft IP it might not get blocked. But I didn't
| make it very far, every step of the way was like watching paint
| dry while the interface loaded or did something. Once I finally
| got the thing set up in order to send mail, the API was so
| molasses slow that it couldn't handle our mail throughput.
| Meaning it would take about 30 seconds to send each transactional
| email because of how slow their API is. Well that's only 2880
| emails per day, that is not a reasonable send rate at all.
|
| I have even lost customers over this mess, it's really hard to
| explain to them that they can't receive our email because of
| their provider and not us. Especially when Microsoft has the
| audacity to return: 250 OK Email Queued (but then not deliver it
| anyway!)
|
| If anyone has any solutions to this mess I am all ears!
| tokyobreakfast wrote:
| It's almost certainly because your customers are reporting your
| emails as spam by moving it into the junk folder which is
| training their systems.
|
| Once enough of your customers do this to cross a certain
| threshold, you are identified as an undesirable sender and QED.
| dijit wrote:
| It happens at scale.
|
| There's like a middle scale where you're not big enough that
| Microsoft will go out of their way to whitelist you, but
| you're big enough that your "send to junk" rate is just high
| in terms of absolute numbers.
|
| It's certainly _not_ a ratio, it _must_ be based on absolute
| numbers because I 've seen it too many times across too many
| companies, and the only ones that get away with it are
| extremely low volume.
|
| Once you have 1,000,000 mails, even a 0.1% mark as spam rate
| is 1,000 emails. - and some people treat mark as spam as
| their delete button, certainly more than 0.1% of people.
| Don't ask me why.
|
| EDIT: on inspection; it's worth noting the mechanism is even
| more insidious than "people mark you as spam". Microsoft also
| weighs delete-without-opening as a negative signal. So if
| you're sending transactional mail (receipts, shipping
| notifications, invoices) and your users get exactly what they
| wanted, feel satisfied, and bin it without opening. You've
| just taken a reputation hit for doing your job correctly. The
| senders most at risk aren't the ones sending rubbish.
|
| EDIT2; theres a reply to me that I can't reply to because its
| [dead]; though the point is valid so I vouched. To them I
| say: I agree. But you probably want your receipt, and thats
| the example I gave (for a reason).
| andrewmcwatters wrote:
| Because everyone and their mother sends spam. It doesn't
| take a genius to figure out why. No, I don't want emails
| about the new product you're releasing. No I don't want
| your newsletter.
|
| I have to actively fight to keep my inbox empty, and free
| of crap. And while I'm ranting, notifications I actually
| want on my phone are co-opted by advertisements, which
| Apple and Google should actively prevent, but they won't
| because they use push notifications to commingle
| advertising to you with important, sometimes time-sensitive
| notifications.
|
| Everyone thinks they have something worth sharing. Over
| three nines of the time, people don't. I will happily be
| apart of the 0.1% who sends your crap straight to the spam
| filter for Gmail to train.
|
| It's spam. It's almost all spam. Even the transactional
| stuff for logging in, I don't want. Just use an email,
| password, and TOTP. Stop sending me emails.
|
| Stop it.
| LorenPechtel wrote:
| Delete without opening shouldn't be treated as negative. I
| generally keep the stuff on your list, but I almost never
| open the it's-your-turn e-mails--the title contains
| everything I need to know. And, likewise, Meetup
| notifications--I dump most of them unread as the title is
| enough to tell me I'm not interested in that event.
| adrian_b wrote:
| I do not think that is true.
|
| Once when this happened to me a couple of years ago, it was
| the opposite.
|
| My e-mails were put by default by Microsoft as spam into the
| junk folder, without the customer knowing anything about
| this.
|
| After I succeeded to notify him about this, he searched there
| the e-mails and marked them as "not spam", and then he
| received my following e-mails.
|
| So initially the customer did nothing and was not aware that
| some of the e-mails sent to him are classified as spam, and
| he had to do active efforts to override this default action
| by Microsoft.
|
| There was absolutely nothing suspicious about the e-mail
| messages classified as spam in their content, their only
| fault was not coming from one of the few major e-mail
| providers.
| bluecalm wrote:
| Almost certainly not. Microsoft was the only email provider
| we had problems with a few years back. We only sent emails to
| people who paid us several hundred USD to send that email. We
| didn't sent anything else - no follow ups, marketing,
| announcements, nothing.
| throwaway613746 wrote:
| My company has been massively affected by this over the past
| month.
|
| It sucks having to tell customers "this is on Microsoft's end,
| we're trying to work through it with them but we don't have an
| ETA and can't say more than that" because Microsoft support is
| absolutely useless. The other day we changed some DMARC/SPF
| records around and that seemed to do the trick but now it appears
| to just be a coincidence.
| msxanadu wrote:
| A question related to the outlook.com false spam mail problem...
| Why are incoming emails to outlook.com so large? 15KB _minimum_
| for a text email with just a title. Equivalent Gmail to /from
| Apple Mail is just a couple of KB.
| elcritch wrote:
| For these large services it seems that small companies should be
| allowed to sue them.
|
| Otherwise there's no incentive for the big providers to care.
|
| Similarly for anti-virus. It's a PITA when Windows or Mac falsely
| flag a program as a virus when it's not in their app stores.
| dqv wrote:
| Yes, at least in the US, being a litigious freak gets results.
|
| Weird trick to get unblocked: follow the standard three-email
| procedure to sender support, then send a fourth email ccing
| buscond@microsoft.com telling them to unblock or next step is
| attorney general.
|
| The thing about a lot of attorney generals is they LOVE to
| smack down a big corporation like Microsoft for the little guy.
| LorenPechtel wrote:
| I'm thinking perhaps they turned on some idiot AI. And they don't
| want to back down and admit they did it wrong.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2026-03-04 23:00 UTC)