That's probably more true in general than it is in this particular case. Gmail does IP reputation differently than other major ISPs, and domain/content reputation are very different beasts entirely.
Gmail's approach with a low-reputation IP is generally to throttle it aggressively; mail still gets through, just not very quickly if you're sending in bulk.
Domain reputation is not initially distrusted unless it's a brand-new domain (registered in the last 30 days or so), and generally doesn't come into play unless there's very unusually poor metrics (think sky-high spam complaints) associated with the domain. Content reputation is applied in a similar manner.
The headers I'm looking at should most likely give Gmail enough distinct identifiers to work with to isolate it from broader reputation issues at Hetzner, but the post only included partial headers, so I can't quite say that conclusively.
Gmail's approach with a low-reputation IP is generally to throttle it aggressively; mail still gets through, just not very quickly if you're sending in bulk.
Domain reputation is not initially distrusted unless it's a brand-new domain (registered in the last 30 days or so), and generally doesn't come into play unless there's very unusually poor metrics (think sky-high spam complaints) associated with the domain. Content reputation is applied in a similar manner.
The headers I'm looking at should most likely give Gmail enough distinct identifiers to work with to isolate it from broader reputation issues at Hetzner, but the post only included partial headers, so I can't quite say that conclusively.