What are InboxAlly's spamming practices and their impact?
Michael Ko
Co-founder & CEO, Suped
Published 6 Jun 2025
Updated 15 Aug 2025
8 min read
When an email tool promises to significantly boost your inbox placement through unconventional means, it often raises an eyebrow in the email deliverability community. InboxAlly is one such platform, marketing itself as a solution that ensures emails land in the primary inbox, avoiding spam folders and promotional tabs. The core of their strategy revolves around generating engagement signals to internet service providers (ISPs).
This approach, while sounding appealing on the surface, sparks critical questions about its underlying practices. Are these engagement signals genuine, or are they artificially inflated? More importantly, what is the long-term impact on a sender's reputation and overall email deliverability when relying on such methods?
The concern isn't just theoretical. Reports from the email community suggest that some of InboxAlly's methods, and those of its users, might stray into practices that are widely considered spamming. This article will explore these practices and their potential repercussions on your email program.
The premise of InboxAlly's approach
InboxAlly's primary claim is to use an army of bots with real email accounts to interact with your clients’ emails. The stated goal is to teach inbox providers not to send emails to the spam or promotions folder, but directly to the primary inbox. This involves actions like opening emails, replying to them, marking them as not spam, and moving them from other folders to the primary inbox. It's designed to mimic positive user engagement, thereby theoretically improving the sender’s reputation in the eyes of ISPs.
The underlying assumption is that ISPs rely heavily on these engagement metrics to determine inbox placement. While engagement is indeed a crucial factor, the nature of that engagement is paramount. ISPs are increasingly sophisticated in distinguishing genuine human interaction from automated or artificial engagement. Their algorithms analyze a vast array of signals, not just opens and clicks, but also reply patterns, forwarding, deletion rates, and how often users mark emails as spam.
A key issue arises when these engagement signals are generated for email lists that are non-opt-in. This means emails are being sent to recipients who have not explicitly given permission to receive them. Sending to unconsenting recipients, regardless of subsequent artificial engagement, aligns with the definition of unsolicited commercial email, commonly known as spam.
The InboxAlly promise
InboxAlly positions itself as an email deliverability tool designed to enhance engagement signals. Their claim is that through these signals, emails are kept out of spam folders and redirected to the primary inbox, ultimately boosting open and click-through rates. This strategy attempts to influence mailbox providers' filtering decisions by simulating positive user interactions with emails.
Questionable engagement and spamming practices
The ethical concerns surrounding services that use artificial engagement are significant. When emails are sent to addresses that have never opted in, and then engagement is simulated to improve delivery, it essentially legitimizes what would otherwise be considered spam. This circumvents the fundamental principle of permission-based email marketing, which is the cornerstone of good deliverability.
ISPs have robust systems in place to detect and filter unsolicited emails. Their objective is to protect their users from unwanted communications and maintain the integrity of their email service. While a service like InboxAlly might temporarily boost metrics by creating fake engagement, this does not address the core issue of sending to unengaged or unconsenting recipients. Such practices often lead to mail being flagged by spam filters, eventually causing deliverability issues.
Moreover, actively sending to non-opt-in lists and then using artificial means to get those emails delivered can lead to severe consequences for the sender’s reputation. Mailbox providers, including Google and Yahoo's new spam rate threshold, are increasingly scrutinizing sender practices. If detected, such methods can result in significant penalties, including blocklisting (or blacklisting) and permanent damage to domain reputation, impacting all future email campaigns.
InboxAlly's approach
Artificial engagement: Utilizes bots or real accounts to open, click, and reply to emails, moving them out of spam.
Non-opt-in lists: May be used with recipient lists that have not explicitly given consent, violating ethical email practices.
Circumvention: Attempts to bypass spam filters by mimicking good behavior, rather than adhering to best practices.
Legitimate email deliverability
Genuine engagement: Focuses on content, segmentation, and timing to foster authentic recipient interaction.
Permission-based lists: Strictly adheres to opt-in practices, ensuring recipients want your emails.
Adherence: Follows industry standards, including SPF, DKIM, and DMARC, and provides clear unsubscribe options.
Impact on sender reputation and deliverability
The immediate impact of using a tool like InboxAlly might appear positive, with temporary boosts in open rates and reduced spam placements. However, this is often a superficial improvement. ISPs are continuously evolving their spam detection algorithms. They analyze not just individual signals but also the patterns and context of email interactions. Artificial engagement, when detected, can lead to severe and lasting damage to a sender's reputation.
When an ISP identifies a sender as engaging in manipulative practices, the consequences can range from emails being consistently routed to spam folders to outright blocklisting (or blacklisting) of the sending IP or domain. Being on an email blacklist or a blocklist means your emails will be rejected by many recipients, regardless of their content or the legitimacy of your actual list. This can effectively cripple your email marketing efforts.
Furthermore, relying on artificial engagement means that underlying deliverability issues are never truly addressed. If your emails are going to spam, it's usually due to factors like poor list hygiene, low legitimate engagement, high spam complaints, or technical misconfigurations. A tool that masks these issues with fake signals prevents marketers from implementing real, sustainable solutions. This can lead to a vicious cycle where a sender becomes increasingly dependent on such tools, while their actual sender reputation deteriorates unnoticed.
Increased likelihood of future spam folder placement or rejection.
Sender reputation
Apparent improvement in reputation metrics (e.g., opens).
Severe damage to domain and IP reputation once detected.
List hygiene
No immediate pressure to clean or segment lists.
Accumulation of spam traps and invalid addresses, leading to blocklists.
Why "fake" engagement fails in the long run
Modern spam filters are incredibly sophisticated. They go beyond simple engagement metrics and analyze a multitude of factors, including sender authentication (SPF, DKIM, DMARC), content quality, sender history, recipient complaints, and the overall sending patterns. Any attempts to artificially inflate engagement are increasingly detected and penalized.
The ultimate goal for any sender should be to cultivate genuine engagement from an opted-in audience. This is the only sustainable path to long-term deliverability success. Rather than seeking quick fixes or relying on artificial means, focus on building a healthy email program through consent-based practices, valuable content, and regular list hygiene. This approach naturally leads to the positive engagement signals that ISPs truly value.
Companies that guarantee email inbox placement through methods like artificial engagement are problematic because they encourage practices that ultimately harm the sender. The perceived benefits are often short-lived, and the risks of long-term damage to sender reputation are substantial. For a deeper understanding of why emails might be going to spam and how to fix it through legitimate means, you can explore how to diagnose and resolve deliverability issues.
The ethical considerations of spam extend beyond mere deliverability into the realm of user experience and privacy. Unsolicited email, even when disguised by artificial engagement, erodes trust and diminishes the value of email as a communication channel. From an economic perspective on spam, it represents an externality, imposing costs on recipients without compensation.
Views from the trenches
Best practices
Always prioritize building an email list through clear, explicit opt-in methods.
Regularly clean your email lists to remove inactive or unengaged subscribers, as well as spam traps.
Focus on providing valuable content that genuinely engages your audience and encourages natural interaction.
Implement and monitor email authentication protocols like SPF, DKIM, and DMARC for domain protection.
Common pitfalls
Sending emails to purchased or rented lists, which almost always results in poor deliverability.
Relying on artificial engagement tools that attempt to trick ISPs instead of improving core practices.
Ignoring low open rates and high spam complaints, which are critical indicators of deliverability problems.
Failing to segment your audience and tailor content, leading to disengagement and unsubscribes.
Expert tips
Monitor your domain and IP reputation regularly using postmaster tools provided by major ISPs.
Set up feedback loops (FBLs) with mailbox providers to quickly identify and act on spam complaints.
Conduct A/B testing on subject lines and content to optimize engagement and avoid spam triggers.
Ensure your email campaigns comply with international anti-spam laws like CAN-SPAM and GDPR.
Marketer view
Marketer from Email Geeks says InboxAlly and its customers are actively spamming because they received promotional emails to an address never used for sign-ups, where the sender was bragging about high open rates on non-opt-in lists.
October 20, 2020 - Email Geeks
Marketer view
Marketer from Email Geeks says they are creating fake engagement for spammers, and this behavior was not entirely unexpected given their operational model.
October 20, 2020 - Email Geeks
Building genuine email deliverability
The practices employed by InboxAlly, which involve generating artificial engagement for potentially non-opt-in email lists, raise significant concerns within the email deliverability landscape. While they might promise a quick fix for inbox placement, these methods undermine the principles of permission-based marketing and can lead to severe long-term damage to a sender’s reputation.
ISPs are constantly refining their algorithms to detect and penalize artificial behaviors. Relying on such tools prevents senders from addressing the true root causes of deliverability issues, such as poor list hygiene or unengaging content. The focus should always be on building a strong, legitimate sender reputation through ethical practices and genuine audience engagement.
Ultimately, for sustainable email success, the emphasis must shift from quick, questionable tactics to foundational best practices that build trust with both recipients and mailbox providers. This includes meticulous list management, content optimization, and rigorous adherence to email authentication standards.
