On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 6:03 AM, Paul Smith <p...@pscs.co.uk> wrote: > On 13/12/2016 21:41, Eric Henson wrote: > >> Google's spam system--as published in their whitepaper some years >> ago--penalizes email when users mark the emails as spam. So if I mark that >> email as spam without reading it, then the next guy to get one like that is >> more likely to have the email end up in the spam bucket. >> > > Yes, I'd say that subjects like the examples given look very spammy, so > users are more likely just to mark them as spam without opening them. The > emojis won't help, but even without those, the subjects look spammy. Once > many people start marking them as spam, the reputation of the sender will > drop. > > 'Intriguing' subject lines may sound good on the face of it, but they are > designed to get people to open messages without knowing what they are going > to get - which is a very spammy thing to do. Nowadays, the subject should > tell you exactly what you're going to get when you open the message, and be > something that the user is expecting. >
FWIW, we have some internal folks who think that "cutesy" subject lines are a way to get people to read their internal status updates. I mark 'em as spam and haven't been bothered with them after having done that on about 10 of them (they automatically disappear into the spam folder since then). --Kurt
_______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
