![]() |
![]() |
|
Click the comments link on any story to see comments or add your own. |
16 Sep 2004
I had a most illuminating conversation with the managers at a large cable ISP a few weeks ago. They told me that they'd been getting constant requests from their users for more control over the spam filters. Then they changed to a new filter system, and the requests stopped. What happened? The simple difference is that the old filters didn't work very well and the new filters do. When a filter isn't stopping your spam, it's easy to conclude that the problem is that your spam is special, and the filter needs to be adjusted to know about your special spam needs. But it isn't stopping your spam, the reason is really much simpler: It's because it's not a very good spam filter. Although there are plenty of theoretical arguments about why some people might consider a given message to be spam and others wouldn't, the reality seems to be that we all agree what's spam and what's not. For the few arguments where people differ, the differences are not great and the messages in the grey area tend to be ones that people wouldn't object to receiving, but wouldn't care if they were lost, either. (Think newsletters from companies from which you've bought stuff.) posted at: 18:02 :: permanent link to this entry :: 0 comments comments... (Jump to the end to add your own comment) Add your comment... Note: all comments require an email address to send a confirmation to verify that it was posted by a person and not a spambot. Your email won't be displayed unless you check the box below, and won't be used for other purposes. |
Topics
My other sitesOther blogsWord
to the Wise
Related sitesCoalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail
|
||||||||||||||||
© 2005-2008 John R. Levine.
CAN SPAM address harvesting notice: the operator of this website will
not give, sell, or otherwise transfer addresses maintained by this
website to any other party for the purposes of initiating, or enabling
others to initiate, electronic mail messages.