Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 26th Feb 2013 21:31 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 553783
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Actually, no, it doesn't...
by MOS6510 on Wed 27th Feb 2013 08:37
in reply to "RE[6]: Actually, no, it doesn't..."
Oh, YOU can filter on any subject, but you need to enter these rules yourself. There is no switch to have a bunch of Apple filters kick in to action.
Even if there were people would find out and figure out how to bypass them. If "barely legal teens" stops you you can use "blt" or "!UEGIUG!EGUWGgdud".
RE[8]: Actually, no, it doesn't...
by novad on Wed 27th Feb 2013 08:47
in reply to "RE[7]: Actually, no, it doesn't..."




Member since:
2010-06-10
Bad point for Apple. Filtering by subject should be an option, not enforced by a company (As long as the content is legal).
I agree with you that people expect very high standards from Apple and will probably be less tolerant to filtering issues with Apple than with others.
I can't agree more on this one. I would even add that spam should be marked as spam and moved to an according folder, not deleted. (Or only after some time... Maybe 30 days)
The only point where I accept automatic deletion is for a detected security threat (Fishing, virus, ...)