# I am the Watcher. I am your guide through this vast new twtiverse.
#
# Usage:
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/users View list of users and latest twt date.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/twt View all twts.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/mentions?uri=:uri View all mentions for uri.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/conv/:hash View all twts for a conversation subject.
#
# Options:
# uri Filter to show a specific users twts.
# offset Start index for quey.
# limit Count of items to return (going back in time).
#
# twt range = 1 20
# self = https://watcher.sour.is/conv/q7jniva
After many many weeks of frustrating back-and-forth with Google tech support that resulted in my giving up on them and using a forum, I finally have a suggestion to fix my email issue: add SPF and DKIM records to our DNS setup. The comment was made by a person who's been answering support questions on this forum for a long time, and they seem to know what they're talking about.
I'm pretty blown away by this. Like yes, it's best practice to add these DNS records for your domain to ensure that your emails are not flagged as spam or rejected and your domain is not blacklisted. But we are using Google to manage our email, and email *within our organization* is being flagged as spam incorrectly by *Google's own spam filter*. Google does not have control over our DNS setup, but they have control over all that other stuff. They pretend to be more or less a turnkey email solution, and yet you need to do some fiddly DNS configuration, something I'd guess most people don't know how to do, to get their email to work reliably *within your own organization*?
That feels bizarre.
@abucci I think it’s fine to require users to install these DNS entries. The domain isn’t under Google’s control, so there’s nothing they can do. You can always transfer your domain to Google (please don’t 😅).
Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut why wasn’t Google support able to tell you this? SPF/DKIM is a basic part of today’s email. It’s one of the first things they should have checked.
Let’s say there’s room for improvement when it comes to Google support. 🙄
@abucci I think it’s fine to require users to install these DNS entries. The domain isn’t under Google’s control, so there’s nothing they can do. You can always transfer your domain to Google (please don’t 😅).
Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut why wasn’t Google support able to tell you this? SPF/DKIM is a basic part of today’s email. It’s one of the first things they should have checked.
Let’s say there’s room for improvement when it comes to Google support. 🙄
@abucci I think it’s fine to require users to install these DNS entries. The domain isn’t under Google’s control, so there’s nothing they can do. You can always transfer your domain to Google (please don’t 😅).
Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut why wasn’t Google support able to tell you this? SPF/DKIM is a basic part of today’s email. It’s one of the first things they should have checked.
Let’s say there’s room for improvement when it comes to Google support. 🙄
@abucci I think it’s fine to require users to install these DNS entries. The domain isn’t under Google’s control, so there’s nothing they can do. You can always transfer your domain to Google (please don’t 😅).
Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut why wasn’t Google support able to tell you this? SPF/DKIM is a basic part of today’s email. It’s one of the first things they should have checked.
Let’s say there’s room for improvement when it comes to Google support. 🙄
@abucci Oh wow! 😳 I can't say I've ever run into this problem myself really, but that _may_ be because by default I always setup SPF and DKIM records on domain I enable Email for, regardless of how/who/what run/hosts that Email 😅
@abucci Oh wow! 😳 I can't say I've ever run into this problem myself really, but that _may_ be because by default I always setup SPF and DKIM records on domain I enable Email for, regardless of how/who/what run/hosts that Email 😅
@abucci Oh wow! 😳 I can't say I've ever run into this problem myself really, but that _may_ be because by default I always setup SPF and DKIM records on domain I enable Email for, regardless of how/who/what run/hosts that Email 😅
@abucci Oh wow! 😳 I can't say I've ever run into this problem myself really, but that _may_ be because by default I always setup SPF and DKIM records on domain I enable Email for, regardless of how/who/what run/hosts that Email 😅
@movq Right? If they'd said "oh yes, just do x,y,z to your domain" this would have been over long ago.
That said, I do think they could route within-organization emails without requiring DNS entries, since they fully control that infrastructure. They know who the valid users are, they know where we're sending from (since we're all using the gmail webapp), so there's no reason that they couldn't deliver emails directly. My coworker, using the gmail webapp, sends an email to me, who's also using the gmail webapp, we're both within the same organization, and somehow their email goes to my spam folder because our SPF and DKIM records aren't right? That's super weird.
@abucci No I agree, that is super weird. Aaaaaaaannnnnnnnnddddd I'm willing to beter any amount of dollar bucks that Google™ don't even fucking know how their shit works 🤣 µServices baby 🤣 µServices all the way to the moon and back! 🤣
@abucci No I agree, that is super weird. Aaaaaaaannnnnnnnnddddd I'm willing to beter any amount of dollar bucks that Google™ don't even fucking know how their shit works 🤣 µServices baby 🤣 µServices all the way to the moon and back! 🤣
@abucci No I agree, that is super weird. Aaaaaaaannnnnnnnnddddd I'm willing to beter any amount of dollar bucks that Google™ don't even fucking know how their shit works 🤣 µServices baby 🤣 µServices all the way to the moon and back! 🤣
@abucci No I agree, that is super weird. Aaaaaaaannnnnnnnnddddd I'm willing to beter any amount of dollar bucks that Google™ don't even fucking know how their shit works 🤣 µServices baby 🤣 µServices all the way to the moon and back! 🤣
@abucci Ah, I see what you meant. Yes, you have a point there. Within their internal network/services, there’s not really a need for SPF/DKIM.
On the other hand, *requiring* it means you’ll notice failures sooner, because even your own internal email fails, so hey, there’s that. 🤣
@abucci Ah, I see what you meant. Yes, you have a point there. Within their internal network/services, there’s not really a need for SPF/DKIM.
On the other hand, *requiring* it means you’ll notice failures sooner, because even your own internal email fails, so hey, there’s that. 🤣
@abucci Ah, I see what you meant. Yes, you have a point there. Within their internal network/services, there’s not really a need for SPF/DKIM.
On the other hand, *requiring* it means you’ll notice failures sooner, because even your own internal email fails, so hey, there’s that. 🤣
@abucci Ah, I see what you meant. Yes, you have a point there. Within their internal network/services, there’s not really a need for SPF/DKIM.
On the other hand, *requiring* it means you’ll notice failures sooner, because even your own internal email fails, so hey, there’s that. 🤣
@movq definitely a good point! I didn't set any of this up and I get the impression the people who did were not technically oriented, so the silver lining is that I can help set us up a little better. So that's good lol
@abucci I used to manage an organisation within Google for Domains (now Google Workspace). DKIM and SPF records were added automatically to the domains, the issue you are describing never was for me. You can always delete the synthetic records that Google creates, and add everything manually.