Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(July 2003)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: AOL blocking
From: Russ Allbery <rra @ stanford . edu>
Organization: The Eyrie
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 14:50:01 -0700
To: list-managers @ greatcircle . com
In-reply-to: <ACA95F76-B861-11D7-A3E4-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> (Chuq VonRospach's message of "Thu, 17 Jul 2003 07:19:27 -0700")
References: <ACA95F76-B861-11D7-A3E4-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com>
User-agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) XEmacs/21.4 (Common Lisp, linux)

Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com> writes:

> Wouldn't help.

> 90% or more of the spam complaints I see come when users see a mailbox
> full of spam, select everything in the mailbox in frustration, and
> report everything as spam in bulk. They aren't even opening the
> messages. It's a frustration reaction caused by AOL's absolute inability
> to really dent the amount of spam that gets into their mailboxes.

I think it might help this problem somewhat, although not alieviate it
entirely of course, for AOL's spam report button to look at the message
and if it has a List-Unsubscribe header, to try mailing that first.
They'd have to keep a blacklist of spammers who abused that header, or
automatically generate such a list from those spams that someone reported
and then received again with the same List-Unsubscribe header, but it
might be pretty effective.

If the users are going to use the spam button as an unsubscribe button,
why not make it exactly that?

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>



Follow-Ups:
References:
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: AOL blocking
From: "Steve Werby" <steve-lists@befriend.com>
Next: Re: AOL blocking
From: Al Iverson <iverson@mnjazz.com>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: AOL blocking
From: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com>
Next: Re: AOL blocking
From: Al Iverson <iverson@mnjazz.com>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com