Re: [Asrg] Adding a spam button to MUAs

Paul Russell <prussell@nd.edu> Wed, 16 December 2009 17:09 UTC

Return-Path: <prussell@nd.edu>
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 30E503A68E3 for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 09:09:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.443
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.443 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, 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 4jKBwn3uYSTm for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 09:09:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx-p2.cc.nd.edu (mx-p2.cc.nd.edu [129.74.250.58]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FA563A67A4 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 09:09:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mta-1.cc.nd.edu (mta-1.cc.nd.edu [129.74.250.35]) by mx-p2.cc.nd.edu (Switch-3.3.0/Switch-3.3.0) with ESMTP id nBGH9bXX015951 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <asrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:09:38 -0500
Received: from [172.19.226.93] (nat20.cc.nd.edu [129.74.4.120]) (authenticated bits=0) by mta-1.cc.nd.edu (Switch-3.3.0/Switch-3.3.0) with ESMTP id nBGH8hV1014662 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <asrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:08:44 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <4B29141B.2040904@nd.edu>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:08:43 -0500
From: Paul Russell <prussell@nd.edu>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0912082138050.20682@simone.lan> <20091216014800.GA29103@gsp.org> <DBF77720-200E-4846-949F-924388F9CC15@blighty.com>
In-Reply-To: <DBF77720-200E-4846-949F-924388F9CC15@blighty.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Source-IP: 129.74.250.35
X-ND-MTA-Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:09:38 EST
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Adding a spam button to MUAs
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: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 17:09:01 -0000

On 12/15/2009 20:50, Steve Atkins wrote:
> On Dec 15, 2009, at 5:48 PM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> 
>> I think allowing end users access to such a button is a terrible idea.
>> This is the same population that routinely replies to spam, falls for
>> phishes, and fails to correctly execute rudimentary tasks like unsubscribing
>> from a mailing list or trimming quoted material from replies.  It would
>> be simpler and about as accurate to simply check a random number generator's
>> output for a "spam?/not-spam?" opinion.
> 
> Data from actual reality contradicts your (otherwise plausible) reasoning.
> 

Our "actual reality" includes an AOL feedback loop stream that consists
primarily of:

* spam complaints about personal messages from family members or friends;

* spam complaints about replies to messages initially sent by the user who
  subsequently reported the reply as spam;

* spam complaints about messages posted to COI lists to which the user had
  previously and explicitly subscribed.

None of these messages should have been reported as spam, but they were, and
they outnumber legitimate complaints by a wide margin.

-- 
Paul Russell, Senior Systems Administrator
OIT Messaging Services Team
University of Notre Dame