IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Asrg] Summary/outline of why the junk button idea is pre-failed

Ian Eiloart <iane@sussex.ac.uk> Wed, 03 March 2010 11:22 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 6745528C2C4 for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Mar 2010 03:22:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.136
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.136 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.693, 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 gdEbePlDdDRe for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Mar 2010 03:22:21 -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 C4B8A3A8D7A for <asrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 3 Mar 2010 03:22:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lewes.staff.uscs.susx.ac.uk ([139.184.135.133]:63891) by sivits.uscs.susx.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.64) (envelope-from <iane@sussex.ac.uk>) id KYPEB3-000L39-6Z for asrg@irtf.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2010 11:23:27 +0000
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2010 11:22:13 +0000
From: Ian Eiloart <iane@sussex.ac.uk>
Sender: iane@sussex.ac.uk
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
Message-ID: <3933FFA87B1FD0668892B35B@lewes.staff.uscs.susx.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <20100302155638.GA2653@gsp.org>
References: <20100302131810.GA22938@gsp.org> <Pine.GSO.4.64.1003020824500.16639@nber6.nber.org> <20100302155638.GA2653@gsp.org>
Originator-Info: login-token=Mulberry:01+NMWJ2E0hIw5QGqJZPlrSImaXks3gVv5bT4=; 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/outline of why the junk button idea is pre-failed
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, 03 Mar 2010 11:22:22 -0000

--On 2 March 2010 10:56:38 -0500 Rich Kulawiec <rsk@gsp.org> wrote:

>
> On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 08:40:33AM -0500, Daniel Feenberg wrote:
>> This message ignores the existence of TIS buttons on existing MUAs
>> for webmail operators, and the actual experience that those
>> operators have.
>
> No, actually, it takes that into primary consideration.  It simply
> extrapolates out to Internet scale by asking "what if everyone did this?"
>

I've found AOL feedback loop reports very useful. In fact, the false 
positives have been the most useful because they've given me the evidence 
to argue for better practice on our systems. That is, people have reported 
messages from subscribed forums - I've argued that the forum should have 
finer grained controls over email notifications (at thread level), and that 
the messages should contain links to the controls that they have.


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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email