> 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 Agr

> 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.