On 9/16/2014 8:16 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 16.09.2014 um 14:07 schrieb John Wilcock:
Le 16/09/2014 13:29, Reindl Harald a écrit :
works, however, the penalty of 2 for 'List-Unsubscribe' without 'List-Id'
feels a little bit unfair
What's unfair about being penalised for not being standards-compliant?
RFC2919 states that a mailing list SHOULD add a List-Id header,
just as RFC2369 states that it SHOULD add a List-Unsubscribe header
i am talking about a *newsletter* not a classical mailing-list
and the word SHOULD in a RFC has a different meaning than MUST
hence a prenalty of 2 is large
the point is that 'List-Unsubscribe' in context of a newsletter
with modern MUA's is helpful even if it is not a mailing-list
because it can be displayed in a standard way *additional* to
the mandatory unscubscribe-link you need to seek in the message
so somebody try to do the enduser something good (as i did) and
add this header without invent a "list-id" get a *high* penalty
that's how things are if you have both jobs - mailadmin and
developer of CMS systems with newsletters and try to make both
jobs as good as possible - you see both sides
As a general rule, I only focus efforts on rule rescoring except where
FPs occur or they are likely to occur. This is an edge case at best and
it wasn't causing a FP under SAs default 5.0 scoring.
regards,
KAM
