>>
>> All of this doesn't translate to the end-user, though. There's no way I
>> could ever set up a set of rules, in the form of an end-user doc, that
>> could be used to describe when to unsubscribe and when not to, and under
>> what conditions an email can be trusted and when it shouldn't (beyo
Hi,
>> For the Nigerian 419 spam, the last thing you want to do is reply to it
:)
>
> unsubscribe doesn't mean "reply"
>
> where I sit, if you can't unsubscribe with ONE click, they get the hard
block
All of this doesn't translate to the end-user, though. There's no way I
could ever set up a set
On 2014-08-13 07:14, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
call an unsubscribe-hook _and_ train as spam.
Should be viable for both solicided an unsolicited mail.
Or, does anyone think that unsubscribing spam is counter-productive
still?
On 13.08.14 11:06, Dave Warren wrote:
In short, yes, it is unpro
On 2014-08-13 17:47, Steve Bergman wrote:
On 08/13/2014 01:06 PM, Dave Warren wrote:
In short, yes, it is unproductive. The quasi-legitimate stuff does go
away, but the rest doesn't. This was confirmed just recently by Laura on
Word To The Wise, who posted about this just 5 days ago:
https://
On 08/13/2014 01:06 PM, Dave Warren wrote:
In short, yes, it is unproductive. The quasi-legitimate stuff does go
away, but the rest doesn't. This was confirmed just recently by Laura on
Word To The Wise, who posted about this just 5 days ago:
https://wordtothewise.com/2014/08/unsubscribing-sp
On 2014-08-13 07:14, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
call an unsubscribe-hook _and_ train as spam.
Should be viable for both solicided an unsolicited mail.
Or, does anyone think that unsubscribing spam is counter-productive
still?
In short, yes, it is unproductive. The quasi-legitimate stuff
--As of August 13, 2014 11:25:26 AM -0400, David F. Skoll is alleged to
have said:
I believe that unsubscribing is safe. If the list owner is legitimate,
unsubscribing will work. If the list owner is a spammer, he/she already
has your email address and I don't believe spammers track the valid
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 17:11:32 +0200
Axb wrote:
> On 08/13/2014 05:04 PM, Antony Stone wrote:
> > For the Nigerian 419 spam, the last thing you want to do is reply
> > to it :)
> unsubscribe doesn't mean "reply"
The point is that any unsubscribe mechanism must of necessity inform
the list owner t
On 08/13/2014 05:04 PM, Antony Stone wrote:
For the Nigerian 419 spam, the last thing you want to do is reply to it :)
unsubscribe doesn't mean "reply"
where I sit, if you can't unsubscribe with ONE click, they get the hard
block
>That's true, but a lot of users (I've done it myself) forg
On 08/13/2014 10:04 AM, Antony Stone wrote:
Which is why we can't rely on them to unsubscribe, and need another way of
stopping it coming in.
When they complain, why not tell them to unsubscribe? Perhaps my view is
clouded by the fact that I have 1 mail server and 100 users, and not 100
mail
On Wednesday 13 August 2014 at 16:14:06 (EU time), Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
call an unsubscribe-hook _and_ train as spam.
Should be viable for both solicided an unsolicited mail.
Or, does anyone think that unsubscribing spam is counter-productive still?
On 13.08.14 16:43, Antony Stone wro
On Wednesday 13 August 2014 at 16:51:28 (EU time), David F. Skoll wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 16:43:29 +0200
>
> Antony Stone wrote:
> > - spammers who get unsubscribe responses will use that to confirm
> > the address and send more, therefore unsubscribing to them is a bad
> > idea
>
> I won
On 08/13/2014 09:37 AM, Axb wrote:
the so called "legit" will set your addr flag as unsubbed
I see a significant amount of "spam" to my users from truly legitimate
sources. Where "truly legitimate" doesn't mean that they are
legitimately the USDA or Merrill Lynch. These can be fire arms ads f
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 16:43:29 +0200
Antony Stone wrote:
> - spammers who get unsubscribe responses will use that to confirm
> the address and send more, therefore unsubscribing to them is a bad
> idea
I wonder how often this happens. This implies that spammers actually care
about the quality of
On Wednesday 13 August 2014 at 16:14:06 (EU time), Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
> >> Bowie Bailey wrote:
> >>> But you still have to consider point 1. If a user starts complaining
> >>> that he's getting spam from Amazon, I'm not going to mess with SA, I'm
> >>> going to tell him to click the u
On 08/13/2014 04:14 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
Bowie Bailey wrote:
But you still have to consider point 1. If a user starts complaining
that he's getting spam from Amazon, I'm not going to mess with SA, I'm
going to tell him to click the unsubscribe link at the bottom of the
email. (Ass
Bowie Bailey wrote:
But you still have to consider point 1. If a user starts complaining
that he's getting spam from Amazon, I'm not going to mess with SA, I'm
going to tell him to click the unsubscribe link at the bottom of the
email. (Assuming that it actually is from Amazon, of course)
Al
On 08/12/2014 05:11 PM, Kris Deugau wrote:
So... What do you do, when user A gets extremely mad to see
$legitimatenewsletter in their Inbox, and user B gets extremely mad to
see $legitimatenewsletter in their Spam folder?
Tell user A to unsubscribe? And don't do anything to increase the
ch
On 2014-08-12 15:11, Kris Deugau wrote:
So... What do you do, when user A gets extremely mad to see
$legitimatenewsletter in their Inbox, and user B gets extremely mad to
see $legitimatenewsletter in their Spam folder? If you only have a
global policy with no way to adjust on a per-user basis,
Alex wrote:
> Bowie Bailey wrote:
>> But you still have to consider point 1. If a user starts complaining
>> that he's getting spam from Amazon, I'm not going to mess with SA, I'm
>> going to tell him to click the unsubscribe link at the bottom of the
>> email. (Assuming that it actually is from
Hi,
>> I disagree with that. In my opinion, only two criteria are needed
>> to define spam:
>>
>> 1) An objective criterion: Was the message unsolicited?
>
> Unfortunately, that can be difficult to determine. People frequently put
themselves on mailing lists as a consequence of creating a free a
On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 10:02:37 -0400
Bowie Bailey wrote:
> On 8/12/2014 9:48 AM, David F. Skoll wrote:
> > 1) An objective criterion: Was the message unsolicited?
> Unfortunately, that can be difficult to determine.
Yes, definitely. But in principle, a message is either solicited or
not, regardl
On 8/12/2014 9:48 AM, David F. Skoll wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 09:41:07 -0400
Alex wrote:
I define "legitimate" as having been sent through a reputable
company's mail system. Chances are, Computer Associates aren't
spamming people.
I disagree with that. In my opinion, only two criteria are
On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 09:41:07 -0400
Alex wrote:
> I define "legitimate" as having been sent through a reputable
> company's mail system. Chances are, Computer Associates aren't
> spamming people.
I disagree with that. In my opinion, only two criteria are needed
to define spam:
1) An objective c
Hi,
> > We periodically have users that complain about receiving email they
believe
> > to be spam, but it looks to be legitimate.
>
> What's your definition of "legitimate" :) ?
>
> My definition of spam is email which is:
>
> - unsolicited (ie: the user didn't sign up for some newsletter or mai
On 08/11/2014 02:02 PM, Alex wrote:
Hi,
Hopefully you'll consider this a related question, as I would really
appreciate your input. We periodically have users that complain about
receiving email they believe to be spam, but it looks to be legitimate.
I'm still pretty much a newbie after only 3
On Monday 11 August 2014 at 21:02:38 (EU time), Alex wrote:
> We periodically have users that complain about receiving email they believe
> to be spam, but it looks to be legitimate.
What's your definition of "legitimate" :) ?
My definition of spam is email which is:
- unsolicited (ie: the use
Am 11.08.2014 um 21:02 schrieb Alex:
> We periodically have users that complain about receiving email they
> believe to be spam
you will never goal an universal opinion about "what is ham/spam" on
shared systems
if not tagged auto ( or by the admin after "human watch" etc ), users
may blacklist it
Hi,
Hopefully you'll consider this a related question, as I would really
appreciate your input. We periodically have users that complain about
receiving email they believe to be spam, but it looks to be legitimate. One
current case was an email received from Computer Associates. It passed
through C
29 matches
Mail list logo
