suggestion: a new "MeNotRecipient" destination folder

Hi,

 I am new to ASK and to this list. I made some research in the
archives, but I may have missed some past messages and may land on an
already discussed subject; in this case, thanks for pointing out the
right references.

 The suggestion in this message is about a new, optional (and disabled
by default), "Bulkier" or "MeNotRecipient" destination folder, besides
"Bulk" and "Junk" folders. Messages that go into this folder do _not_
trigger a confirmation request (just like the "Bulk" folder).

 The motivation for this folder is to handle, as an ultimate step
after the mailing-lists step (see the graph at :
<http://www.paganini.net/ask/paper/node3.html>) messages that do not
have any of my addresses in clear in the message; i.e., neither
"To: me" nor "Cc: me"


These messages can be:

(1) messages that were Bcc:'ed to me by people not present in my
whitelist
(2) messages from mailing-lists that were unfortunately not recognized
before, not even by the "all mailing-lists" catcher (see graph).
(3) and of course, for the majority of them: spams.


Let's detail each of the above categories:

(1) I think these messages are very seldom: people generally do not
start to communicate with you using a Bcc: If they do, then it means
that this message is probably "bulk" in some way: the only reason I
see to start by Bcc:'ing someone is to avoid a large number of visible
addresses in the To: and Cc: headers. Experience tells me that a
message where you are only one among tens of recipients has generally
low value/urgency/importance, so a potential loss is not a big loss.
Who is sending you important emails with a Bcc: ? Not many people, and
probably really _zero_ once you removed the ones in your whitelist.
Moreover, many Bcc:'ed messages are sensitive, and I think it is a bad
idea to inject sensitive messages into any robot: who knows where will
end the message in case of some error/bug?

(2) IMHO, this second category would also has a low probability.
However, it is one of the motivations behind this new feature/folder:
In today's code, messages in this category trigger a confirmation
request, which is a huge mistake.

(3) Considering the mail I receive today, this category represents
99.9% of (1)+(2)+(3), and approximatively 50% of my whole spam daily
dose. Putting it directly into "Bulkier" without even queueing it is a
significant optimization, and helps avoiding auto-responders.


In any case, this "MeNotRecipient" option would *not* be enabled by
default.


I have looked at the code, and I think implementing this is quite
trivial, thanks to the architecture and quality of the existing code.
I volunteer to implement it and test it, but I want before that to be
sure that it has some interest and that I did not miss some
fundamental flaw in my reasoning above.

Thanks in advance for any comments.


Cheers,

Marc.






-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials.
Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills.  Sign up for IBM's
Free Linux Tutorials.  Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin.
Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id78&alloc_id371&op=click