On Mon, Jun 8, 2020, at 2:03 AM, Douglas E. Foster wrote:
> Stan Kalisch asks: And you propose the average user can understand, much less
> take the time to understand, the substance?
>
> Yes. I believe users are worried about spam, and want to make intelligent
> decisions about whether or not e
In article <3eb519fc08214b4bb23ed00737cdc...@bayviewphysicians.com> you write:
>Yes. I believe users are worried about spam, and want to make intelligent
>decisions about whether or not email
>can be trusted. Unfortunately, our present software denies them access to the
>available information
Hello,
when a message is wrongly evalutated as spam, and is left therefore
unnoticed, it is nobody’s fault. You can signal the users as you want,
including the users, which just redirect mails on your host, and do not
utilize the “Spam” store there.
A message is either likely spam (subject to si
On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 11:04 PM Douglas E. Foster <
fost...@bayviewphysicians.com> wrote:
> Stan Kalisch asks: And you propose the average user can understand, much
> less take the time to understand, the substance?
>
> Yes. I believe users are worried about spam, and want to make
> intelligent
Stan Kalisch asks: And you propose the average user can understand, much less
take the time to understand, the substance?
Yes. I believe users are worried about spam, and want to make intelligent
decisions about whether or not email can be trusted. Unfortunately, our
present software denies
On Sun, Jun 7, 2020, at 7:04 PM, Douglas E. Foster wrote:
> The problem with all current notification methods is that they are relatively
> primitive, often communicating nothing substantive about the suspicious
> message characteristics.
And you propose the average user can understand, much les
On 6/7/2020 4:04 PM, Douglas E. Foster wrote:
Given that market reality, I conclude that most vendors and their
customers believe that user-signalling is useful. The signalling
system does not have to prevent every mistake for the signal to be useful.
What you are describing has nothing at
I am trying to play by the rules and not chase topics outside the one assigned,
but since several have jumped on my comment, I will follow up briefly.
Dave Crocker wrote
Since there has been a demonstrated lack of efficacy in this sort of display,
there needs to be an objective basis for knowing
