Dennis Kennedy, one of the most consistently insightful legal tech writers I know, has posted another incisive message, this time regarding spam and e-mail. 

So, here's the dirty little secret of spam filters. They have fundamentally broken the trust and confidence that was at the root of the whole e-mail system. Fundamentally broken the whole system.

If I can't know for certain that I am getting the e-mail being sent to me that I want to see and that I can't know whether my recipients get my e-mails because I don't know what kind of hyperaggessive spam filter they might be using (or, in some case, might be employed at a server level without their knowledge), then where am I? Do I have to resort to calling to be sure that you get my e-mail? Am I back to hand delivery? [emphasis in original]

My idea and contribution to this subject is the concept of the reverse filter.  Instead of trying to filter out the undesired stuff, filter in the stuff you want.  You can keep the rest and paw through it when you have time, looking for the inadvertently overlooked nuggets before pitching the entire mailbox contents into the trash, ready for the next deluge. 

Assuming that you use an e-mail filter which will allow you to automatically sort incoming mail according to text-based rules, you can create a Wanted Messages folder and use this technique in one of several ways:

• For known and trusted sources, use the filter to move messages where "From" matches their e-mail addresses to the folder.
• If you own your domain, create a special username that is given only to trusted sources, and is never (this means never, never, never) posted anywhere on the internet.  Use the filter to move messages where "To" matches this special address to the folder. 
• If you cannot do this, an alternative is to have trusted sources used a special keyword, either in the subject line or in the body of the message, to enable filtering of their messages.  Choose a word that is not likely to be used in standard messages or in spam.  "Froglips" is an excellent choice. 

Update 11-12:  The more that I think of it, the better this idea is.  The problem with every text-based algorithm used by current spam filters is that the spammers are always staying one step ahead of the people devising the filters.  How many messages have been in your inbox this week saying things like INCR=EA*SE D=CK LEN^GTH ?  No algorithm can figure out every permutation of this dodge.  With a filter-in approach, you define the rules, and instead of you having to figure out how to keep spammers out, the spammer has to figure out a way to get into your inbox.

7:48:02 PM