Comments

Lydia November 9, 2012

Probably I need to learn how to pamper gmail filter – it is constantly sending legit messages to Spam, even after I tell it multiple times that a given message isn’t spam. I am getting so frustrated at times! Fortunately, nobody will sue me for not responding to legit emails but still it isn’t nice to have to dig thru spam to find messages I’ve been waiting for.

Monica Savers November 12, 2012

I actually stopped filtering oncoming mails, and opted for the first tip, which is to constantly check the Junk Mail folder. I learned this lesson when a writing deal almost didn’t push through because I wasn’t able to correspond to their e-mail right away. They had told me to expect it within the week, and when Friday came and I didn’t hear from them, I became anxious. It was then I had a lightbulb moment and realized perhaps it ended in the Spam folder. I was completely right. I don’t know how e-mail algorithms or filters work. One thing is for sure: it’s no longer a guarantee for anything.

Malcolm James November 14, 2012

Spam filters are getting better, but the spammers adapt very quickly and learn the tricks to get around them. Checking the junk folder is an effective way of ensuring you don’t miss those important mails.

Malcolm James November 14, 2012

It can be frustrating, but those filters still block more crap than good, so it’s safe to say that we need them!

Martin Scowski November 14, 2012

I think “pamper” isn’t the word but “cautious.” After all, you have to watch out for the filters, making sure that no legitimate emails end up in there. With that aside, this article makes a lot of sense. I guess people are just too trusting with their e-mail platforms, and I don’t see anything wrong with that. Outlook and Gmail, for example, have excellent filtering system. But yet that doesn’t make them foolproof or not prone to errors anymore. Another point to make is that IT administrators also need to be more proactive about filters. A number of work-related mails may not be received because of strict implementation of these filters.

Jordan Rutherson December 1, 2012

I share the same sentiments with you, Martin. I even think that the article highlights some of the disadvantages of having strong filters in e-mails. I’ve read another blog post about this case. It’s definitely a tragic story. One commenter, however, makes a good case, saying that the investigator should have also opted for a more traditional approach—that is, mailing the notice through Postal Service. Regardless, there are always pros and cons to everything, including the use of spam filters. When the rules are rigid, complications occur, and these complications can cause costly consequences.

  • (required)
  • (required)