On Mon, 12 Jan 2026, Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote:
Dnia 12.01.2026 o godz. 10:29:02 Stuart Henderson via mailop pisze:
New mail coming from a higher volume sender with 0.3% spam could
easily be much less likely to be spam than mail from an unknown /
barely known sender. *Especially* for mail to a wide sample of
recipients (the majority of whom will be far less likely to get mail
from unknown sources than, say, people like us who have been on the
net for longer and communicating with people from mailing lists etc).
Feels like these systems could really do with some kind of "user is
likely to receive legit mail from random places on the net" flag
to reduce false positives without adding too many false negatives.
So there's only one possible conclusion.
Senders that are too low volume to be automatically classified should be
flagged for manual analysis, and in case of such senders only the results of
manual analysis should be taken into account when deciding spam/not spam.
Hmm. Interesting, but this has major privacy issues.
As I have already stated previously, if the receiver has not enough staff to
perform such manual analysis, the should hire more staff. If they insist
they cannot affors to hire more staff, they should go out of email business
--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
[email protected]
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
