Dnia 12.01.2026 o godz. 10:29:02 Stuart Henderson via mailop pisze: > New mail coming from a higher volume sender with 0.3% spam could > easily be much less likely to be spam than mail from an unknown / > barely known sender. *Especially* for mail to a wide sample of > recipients (the majority of whom will be far less likely to get mail > from unknown sources than, say, people like us who have been on the > net for longer and communicating with people from mailing lists etc). > Feels like these systems could really do with some kind of "user is > likely to receive legit mail from random places on the net" flag > to reduce false positives without adding too many false negatives.
So there's only one possible conclusion. Senders that are too low volume to be automatically classified should be flagged for manual analysis, and in case of such senders only the results of manual analysis should be taken into account when deciding spam/not spam. As I have already stated previously, if the receiver has not enough staff to perform such manual analysis, the should hire more staff. If they insist they cannot affors to hire more staff, they should go out of email business and do something else. Period. -- Regards, Jaroslaw Rafa [email protected] -- "In a million years, when kids go to school, they're gonna know: once there was a Hushpuppy, and she lived with her daddy in the Bathtub." _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list [email protected] https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
