I don't think he's saying they'll take bouncing out. I think he's saying they'll offer the option of hiding the "bounce" column if you decide not to use it, which is the best of both worlds. I hate it when so-called upgrades take away features instead of adding them, and I'm sure the MWP people do too.

I'm not sure that it should be removed from the product. I just want an option to remove the column if I have bouncing turned off.

There is basically no value to the bounce "feature" and MW knows this. Nevertheless they continue to list it first in what MW can do on their website, which is basically dishonest marketing.

From the mailwasher website the first feature listed is "Bounce back unwanted e-mails so it looks as if your email address is not valid. This will make the sender think your address is no longer active so your name can be removed from their list. This unique feature is great for privacy and it couldn’t be simpler! "

Which is all lies and they know it.


They should feature what it is good at, which is sorting mail from spam. If it didn't crash all the time it would be a good program.

Oohhh hold on a minute. I've been using MWP for months and it hasn't crashed once. Look to your own setup. As for marketing the bounce ability... whether bouncing is effective or not is a matter of opinion, even though I'm of the opinion that it isn't. If it does bounce, it's not dishonest to say so. It might discourage some spammers...

glad it works for you.

it is all lies and they do know it and have admitted as much to me in emails directly from mailwasher. it's dishonest as all hell to say what they say on the website and to list bouncing as the first feature. it's irresponsible.

your own post recognizes that this the site lies and misrepresents what the program can do. it VASTLY overstates the value of the supposed bounce feature.

Well, I think that MWPro vendors market bouncing as a major feature, and the idea lures people in. As it doesn't work very often at all and is therefore not an effective spam countermeasure, I think it should not be stated as a major feature (i.e. definitely not listed first!). It is best for the vendors not to lure people in by implying that the bounce feature is actually useful, or it will cause annoyance - just look at the comments on this website! Annoyance will cause the vendors to lose custom on future products, and get bad press whether justified or not.

That said, the bounce feature is useful as is stated by a user elsewhere on this board (can't remember where) for removal from legitamate advertising lists. I think that removal from the display rather than removal from the program is a better idea because at least you still have the option to use it, although removal altogether wouldn't bother me as it is virtually entirely useless to me anyway.

I agree. To tone down the anti-spam aspect of bouncing might be in order. However, It is vastly overstated to say that the developer "lies and misrepresents." For me, the bounce feature plays an important role in my email management strategy. I find it a very valuable feature.

i agree with arhardy.

i do think that it adds up to lies and misrepresentation of what the program is capable of. if it didn't crash, it would be useful for SORTING spam from non-spam. the bouncing feature is vastly overstated on the website, and is a lie and they know it.

I turned off bouncing for the purely practical reason that it took quite a bit of time to bounce 30+ messages (on a dial-up connection) as well as having suspicions that the time delay probably confirmed that my address was valid. Also I have to check mail as I have blacklisted all messages from yahoo and aol because they were generating such large amounts of spam but every now and then there is a genuine message. And in spite of blacklisting several new addresses every day I am amazed at the amount of new spam I receive. I have a feeling this problem is not going to go away until isps take a more active role. Why do messages without a valid return address get through? In the meantime thank heavens for a program which at least means I can easily delete messages before I download them to my PC. In Eudora when there were virus attacks I used to download just headers but mailwasher is much more effortless. Contrary to others in this thread I think I've had good value

I have been using MW and now MW-PRO for over 2 years and have NEVER had it crash.

Bouncing is questionable value since it depends upon the sender to get the bounce back and actually remove it from future mailings. They realize that there are tons of invalid addresses on the lists they get and just ignore bounces. I don't feel that it is a lie, just giving you the option to use the feature. You don't HAVE to use it.

The problem with bouncing is that some sites, specifically YAHOO GROUPS, will shut down your membership in the groups you are a member as soon as you bounce one message. Then you have to reply saying you are still valid yourself to keep getting the messages from the group(s).

I do quite a bit of support work and carry MW with me and install the trial version on just about every one. I have not had one client that did not like the product and end up as a registered user.

No product is perfect for everyone. Just use the features you need and turn off the ones you don't want.

In all the discussions about Bounce or not to Bounce, no-one has thought about the security issues in doing this. I had a feeling that it was dangerous to do the bounce (for most of those run-of-the-mill SPAMmers) and after testing it today -- I was correct.

What most people don't realize is that your IP address can be pulled from the bounce message -- even though it looks like a legitimate bounce. This means that SPAMmers can use an email address to collect these 'fake' bounces, pull the IP numbers and possibly hack the people reporting their SPAM.

Since most bounced emails don't go back to the SPAMmers anyway, it's really only useful for Newsletters you don't want and real people you don't want email from anymore. For all other SPAM, it's best to just turn off that feature or risk getting hacked.

In my opinion anyway...

BTW - MailWasher isn't the only company claiming that bounced emails will reduce the SPAM you get. A lot of the other pkgs out there that provide a bouncing service also claim it will remove you from the SPAMmers' lists. Total B.S., but makes for a nice marketing gimmick (which is all it is when promoted that way).

If you don't like the program, dump it and go elsewhere.

Try to find a program that suits your requirement if there is something out there. If not, then shutup and write your own if you think it is so easy to do. Then you can market it and see what kind of responses YOU get.

The program does all it says it does. That some of the features don't work in the real world of phony mailers is not the fault of the software.

kyham, I think you're being a bit extreme here (sounds a bit like telling someone who wants to improve the country to just leave it instead).

I'm a businessman and have an "above average" level of IT know-how and experience (and a lot of knowledge and experience with FTC/advertising laws, too). I read the MW website and it was pretty clear to me: You bounce, the spammers see it's invalid and remove you from the list, and the volume of your spam goes way down. That was the essential gist of it, and if the Federal Trade Commission or some other objective judge-and-jury looked at the facts, yes, it would surely fall into the realm of what the FTC calls "false and misleading advertising". Not to suggest they would ever care about such an obscure thing (hard to prove how much or little bouncing gets you off lists, and surely not a significant concern to the FTC at this point, of course), but the facts are pretty clear by now -- bouncing does NOT get you off spam lists or reduce your spam IN THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF CASES! The MW website should list it last in the features and clearly say it "may in some cases" have that effect. That's not how it's worded at all!

I was taken in and feel I was entirely misled, and am very disappointed, with respect to that "feature" being trumpeted in their marketing efforts. The FTC would have no trouble whatsoever prosecuting a "false and misleading" suit on this (not that they would ever go after this, and they won’t, I assure you, but the laws and facts are technically there to support it – it’s that “misleading”).

That's not to say I don't think I'll keep the program. I want to explore it more and see how much "training" it can pay off (and look further into how it can be used to integrate with services that help filter out spam).