Why not just have it be a meta test that doesn't trigger if it contains
"sch"? I realize that cuts out things like tjmkln...@fakeemail.com, but it
would catch tsjmhw...@fakeemail.com, so maybe a bit better in both catch
rate and false positives?
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 8:03 AM, Jens Schleusener <
jens.schleuse...@t-online.de> wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Nov 2017, Bill Cole wrote:
>
> On 19 Nov 2017, at 17:11 (-0500), Mark London wrote:
>>
>> Also, 5 consonants in a row, is unlikely.
>>>
>>
>> Well, F. W. Nietzsche never had kids, but I don't think the surname is
>> extinct. I'm aware of multiple people with the surname Pietschmann. There
>> is also a common practice of using a first initial and surname as a
>> username and many Germanic surnames starting with sch[mlr], so I expect
>> that 5 consonants in an email address local-part where 'sch' are the middle
>> 3 characters are quite common.
>>
>
> Although not used currently I had formerly such an assigned accountname
> (jschleus). Since I think the avoiding of FPs should take priority over
> that of FNs I "vote" for the omitting "s".
>
> Maybe it would be a "compromise" to add another regex with at least the
> "s" included but 6 required consonants like
>
> [bcdfgjklmnpqrstvwxz]{6}
>
> Jens
>
--
- Markus
