4 ms·

> have either explicitly signed up for or that is otherwise from a legitimate sender that complies with your local laws and will honor the unsubscripti 2 point

by Macha 3y ago

> have either explicitly signed up for or that is otherwise from a legitimate sender that complies with your local laws and will honor the unsubscripti 2 points: I'd agree that using spam for something a user has signed up for would be unfair, but only in the sense that they understood clearly they were signing up for emails, and not, for example, a confusing opt out tick tied to their purchase. You totally deserve the spam box for that latter one. Similarly, honouring local requirements for unsubscribe is not enough to get you out of spam reports if you didn't have a reason to email me to begin with. That you have a new product or newsletter or corporate announcement isn't good enough, but many marketing people believe it is. The fact that they can't self police is why I'm ok with email providers being strict about this. Really the one thing I miss since moving from Gmail is the knowledge that my use of the spam button hurt deliverability for senders of spammy emails more widely than just my own inbox.

lucb1e 3y ago
> but only in the sense that they understood clearly they were signing up for emails, and not, for example, a confusing opt out tick tied to their purchase Agree! (With the side note that this is already illegal in my area.) > Really the one thing I miss since moving from Gmail is the knowledge that my use of the spam button hurt deliverability for senders of spammy emails more widely than just my own inbox. Agree here, too: a unified list of spammy senders would be nice so we can work together and keep inboxes clean everywhere. But it should cut both ways. A sibling comment mentioned they hit the spam button per the definition of "when I do not want to receive the email". That could mean a personal email from their mom that they weren't wanting to read on a sunday, a legitimate invoice for an activity they booked, or literally anything else. Those people should either be banned from influencing a sender's spam score, or at least be ranked 10-100x lower. (Taking this idea one step too far, probably:) We could even tie those email addresses to other services: just ask youtube, discord, HN, reddit, etc. how often flagging/reporting is used as super-downvote button. If those people are registered as willfully misunderstanding the purpose of the button, that frees up a lot of resources and can increase the rate of correct spam detection significantly by having good labeling on data.

by Macha 3y ago

lucb1e 3y ago

> but only in the sense that they understood clearly they were signing up for emails, and not, for example, a confusing opt out tick tied to their purchase Agree! (With the side note that this is already illegal in my area.) > Really the one thing I miss since moving from Gmail is the knowledge that my use of the spam button hurt deliverability for senders of spammy emails more widely than just my own inbox. Agree here, too: a unified list of spammy senders would be nice so we can work together and keep inboxes clean everywhere. But it should cut both ways. A sibling comment mentioned they hit the spam button per the definition of "when I do not want to receive the email". That could mean a personal email from their mom that they weren't wanting to read on a sunday, a legitimate invoice for an activity they booked, or literally anything else. Those people should either be banned from influencing a sender's spam score, or at least be ranked 10-100x lower. (Taking this idea one step too far, probably:) We could even tie those email addresses to other services: just ask youtube, discord, HN, reddit, etc. how often flagging/reporting is used as super-downvote button. If those people are registered as willfully misunderstanding the purpose of the button, that frees up a lot of resources and can increase the rate of correct spam detection significantly by having good labeling on data.