On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 05:25:16PM -0500, Chris Owen <owenc@hubris.net> wrote a message of 53 lines which said:
It is because, if someone reports (by telephone, IRC or IRL) that he sent an email and I did not receive it, I regard as VERY IMPORTANT to be able to check the spam folder (with a search tool, not by hand) and go back to him saying "No, we really did not receive it".
In article <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAuAAAAAAAAAKTyXRN5/+lGvU59a+P7CFMBAN6gY+ZG84BMpVQcAbDh1IQAA AATbSgAABAAAACflLoEBLafQbWWwpT+evpQAQAAAAA=@iname.com>, Frank Bulk - iNAME <frnkblk@iname.com> writes
You mean, you don't employ *any* spam mitigation techniques besides sorting? Because if you do anything, even as basic as RBLs, you're not being consistent with your stance.
I agree completely with Chris Owen's approach, even though I use spam mitigation techniques. The reason for this is because those "lost" emails that I very occasionally rescue from the spam bucket are: NOT sent by someone on an RBL NOT sent to an unpublished and unused address (eg sales@internetpolicyagency.com) etc. -- Roland Perry