On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 1:46 PM, juan <[1]juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:

     On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 17:47:42 +0000
     Sean Lynch <[2]seanl@literati.org> wrote:
     > I used to have a filter that prevented Gmail from marking cpunks
     mail
     > as spam, but I have intentionally avoided fixing that since the
     list
     > address changed in hopes of training it not to suck so bad. So far
     I
     > don't seem to have had much luck.
             So apparently the system ignores the fact that messages come
             from a mailing list, and treats them as if they came
     directly
             from the original sender's address. And then wrongly marks
     some
             as spam. So it's doing it wrongly, twice.

   I'm not sure how manually blocking based on mailing list headers makes
   any sense. And there are plenty of mailing lists that get lots of spam.
   This used to be how cpunks worked when it was distributed, as has been
   discussed here recently. The end user was expected to run a spam filter
   against the list, subscribe to a filtered mirror, or just put up with
   it.

             Adding a rule to stop it filtering messages with trait
             'comes-from-cypher-whatever' works, but it seems to be
     slightly
             misaligned with the modern philosophy of "automatic system
             built for retards, I mean, for Important People Too Busy To
             Learn Anything".

   Well, the "retards" probably aren't going to care much about a few
   mailing list messages being sent to their spam folder erroneously. I
   can't say I've actually cared about any of the messages that got sent
   to spam, I'm just pedantic about such things. Today, though, the only
   "false positive" was someone I would have blocked anyway. So is it
   really a false positive?

References

   1. mailto:juan.g71@gmail.com
   2. mailto:seanl@literati.org