Is "more outreach volume" actually killing your link building results?

[ethanmiller]

We just published a framework arguing that response rates fall as outreach volume rises — because the tactics used to scale (merge fields, looser lists, generic pitches) are the same tactics that destroy relevance. Curious what this community's real-world experience looks like.
Discussion prompts:

1): Have you noticed response rates drop as your list size grew, or has volume genuinely worked for you?
2): What's the biggest tell that immediately makes you delete an outreach email you receive?
3): How do you personally decide when to stop following up with a prospect who's gone quiet?
4): Do you track refusals and "not now" replies, or only successful links? Has that changed your results?

Full breakdown (pitch structure, deliverability, follow-up cadence, relationship tracking) here: https://www.megrioutreach.com/link-buil ... -framework
Would love to hear how other teams are handling this — especially anyone who's had to recover a domain's sender reputation after a bad campaign.

[amelia]

I’ve definitely seen this happen—scaling outreach too aggressively can hurt relevance and response quality. A smaller, well-researched list with personalized pitches often delivers better results than sending thousands of generic emails. Tracking refusals and “not now” responses also seems valuable for refining targeting and messaging over time.