Re: [Asrg] Summary of junk button discussion

Ian Eiloart <iane@sussex.ac.uk> Thu, 25 February 2010 10:57 UTC

Return-Path: <iane@sussex.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FD953A86BE for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 02:57:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.572
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.572 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.129, BAYES_00=-2.599, SUBJECT_FUZZY_TION=0.156]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id H0oTcPYW3cdM for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 02:57:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sivits.uscs.susx.ac.uk (sivits.uscs.susx.ac.uk [139.184.14.88]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2ED973A86B1 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 02:57:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lewes.staff.uscs.susx.ac.uk ([139.184.135.133]:54141) by sivits.uscs.susx.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.64) (envelope-from <iane@sussex.ac.uk>) id KYE98O-00086R-A5 for asrg@irtf.org; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 11:00:24 +0000
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 10:59:41 +0000
From: Ian Eiloart <iane@sussex.ac.uk>
Sender: iane@sussex.ac.uk
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
Message-ID: <DC9DF074C623B99DE16852DC@lewes.staff.uscs.susx.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <20100225054546.16850.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
References: <20100225054546.16850.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
Originator-Info: login-token=Mulberry:01ISYaboqHiNNik27QjUyUm43hh547yIRMlpE=; token_authority=support@its.sussex.ac.uk
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Mac OS X)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Sussex: true
X-Sussex-transport: remote_smtp
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Summary of junk button discussion
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 10:57:40 -0000

--On 25 February 2010 05:45:46 +0000 John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:

>>> I find it too restrictive to call this a "junk button" as this mechanism
>>> can be used more widely than just this way.
>>
>> Ah, well that's a different question. This particular discussion is
>> about  how to get reports from the user to the administrator of the
>> system. How  the user triggers the report is an exercise for the MUA
>> programmers, but  we've been thinking that it's likely to be a button
>> labelled "junk".
>
> Having talked to a fair number of ISPs who provide junk buttons, none of
> them thought that more buttons would help.  Users don't distinguish among
> all the reasons they might not want a message, and asking them to do so
> is more likely to get random answers or no answers than good ones.

Well, maybe that's true. But have you talked to Twitter, or anyone else who 
has actually tried it. I haven't, but Twitter do provide two buttons: one 
to block and one to report. It's not exactly the same, but it's there.

Apart from that, we're not actually creating these buttons, are we? We're 
defining a reporting mechanism. My view is that it's better to have a 
richer vocabulary defined, and allow implementers to chose which parts to 
use.

In fact, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation (well, I 
wouldn't!) if a few more IMAP flags had been provided for these purposes.


> The only think other than a junk button that appears useful is a
> not-junk button to display when looking at stuff in a junk folder.

>  I suppose we could do that, but then we'd have to define what a junk
> folder is.  Or if we do this with a header applied by the MDA, it could
> have a flag hinting which way the junk flag is set now.
>
> R's,
> John
>
> _______________________________________________
> Asrg mailing list
> Asrg@irtf.org
> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg



-- 
Ian Eiloart
IT Services, University of Sussex
01273-873148 x3148
For new support requests, see http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/