I am new to ASK=A0and 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
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
(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
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.