Digging up this topic, @Anna> you might have had some feedback from Google about that since your message?
I can still sleep at night, but I'm curious about the outcome! -- Benjamin 2017-05-31 18:23 GMT+02:00 Nick Schafer <n...@mailgun.com>: > The feedback loop shouldn't include messages caught by their spam filter > as users aren't able to complain against a message already in the spam > folder. The feedback loop is used to identify campaigns in a sender's > traffic that are getting a high volume of complaints from Gmail users. From > my understanding the user reported spam number would be the overall rate > that day for that DKIM domain while the feedback loop would be for the > identifier specified. But if the only messages they sent that day had the > broadcast identifier, i would expect the rates to be much closer. Maybe an > error or someone complaining then marking not spam, and then doing the same > thing over and over? > > Nick Schafer > Technical Account Manager, Mailgun <http://www.mailgun.com/> > m:(210) 833-3933 > > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Paul Smith <p...@pscs.co.uk> wrote: > >> On 31/05/2017 10:29, Anna Ward wrote: >> >> I've talked to a bunch of different industry folks at this point, and no >> one seems to understand the difference between "user reported spam" and >> "feedback loop spam" in Google Postmaster Tools >> <https://support.google.com/mail/answer/6227174?hl=en>. >> >> A notable example for me was May 8th when a client's DKIM domain showed a >> 100% "feedback loop spam rate" but only a 0.1% "user reported spam rate" ( >> screenshots <http://howdyanna.com/xnnd/>). >> They sent to about 4000 Gmail addresses that day, and the one identifier >> in the Feedback Loop graph was "broadcast" (represents the message type, a >> bulk-send newsletter). All of their outgoing mail used the "broadcast" >> identifier like this: Feedback-Id: xxxx:xxxx:broadcast:getresponse >> >> I just can't think of a scenario where the Feedback Loop could be at 100% >> but the Spam Rate ("user reported") would be at only 0.1%. How are such >> drastic differences possible? >> >> >> If the feedback loop includes messages caught by their spam filter, then >> if their spam blocked everything, that would show 100% as spam, but most >> users wouldn't see the spam or bother reporting it as spam (because it's >> already been caught) so the user reported spam rate would be approaching >> zero. >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mailop mailing list >> mailop@mailop.org >> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > mailop mailing list > mailop@mailop.org > https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop > >
_______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
