Do ISPs provide 'not spam' feedback data, and how can ESPs use it?

Email marketer from Email on Acid suggests that while explicit 'not spam' data isn't widely available, monitoring engagement metrics like open rates, click-through rates, and website visits can provide insights into user sentiment and help identify potential deliverability issues. Decreasing engagement can signal inbox placement problems.

Email marketer from Stackoverflow User explains that 'not spam' clicks are used internally by ISPs to refine their spam filtering algorithms and are rarely shared with ESPs due to privacy concerns and the potential for manipulation.

Email marketer from ReturnPath explains that Feedback Loops are a critical element. They receive data on spam complaints and use it to identify and resolve delivery issues. ESPs can use this to improve delivery, but no direct data on 'not spam' is provided.

Email marketer from Mailjet responds that they don't receive specific data on 'This is not spam' clicks directly from ISPs. Mailjet suggests monitoring engagement metrics (opens, clicks) to identify potentially suppressed contacts and adjust sending practices accordingly.

Email marketer from Email Geeks explains that while any single data point may be limited, aggregating multiple data points can help tell a more complete story and improve spam filtering, especially for ESPs policing users worldwide.

Email marketer from Email Geeks suggests that knowing definitively when a sender's emails go to the spam folder can be useful. This can be used as a signal to feed internal reputation systems and provide education points for the user.

Email marketer from Postmark suggests that tracking engagement metrics like opens and clicks, as well as monitoring bounce rates, is crucial for assessing deliverability. While 'not spam' data is rare, consistent engagement indicates positive inbox placement.

Email marketer from Reddit explains that some ISPs provide aggregated data on spam complaints but rarely share individual data on 'not spam' clicks. The 'not spam' button primarily helps train the ISP's spam filters for that user.

Email marketer from Email Geeks responds that while you can infer spam placement based on open/click data and lack of TIS reports, there's no specific signal confirming emails always/sometimes go to the spam folder.

Email marketer from Email Geeks shares that there is no way to automatically remove "non-spam" voters from spam complaint suppression lists. Recipients must contact the senders, who then have to remove them manually.

Email marketer from SparkPost shares that participating in Feedback Loops (FBLs) with ISPs like Gmail provides valuable data on spam complaints. Analyzing FBL data helps ESPs identify problematic campaigns, address issues like list hygiene, and improve overall deliverability. They do not provide 'not spam' data.

Email marketer from Quora User states that while direct 'not spam' feedback is uncommon, ESPs can leverage feedback loops (FBLs) to understand complaint patterns, segment their audiences better, and improve their authentication practices. ISPs prioritize negative feedback.

Email marketer from Litmus explains that inbox placement monitoring tools can help ESPs assess where their emails are landing (inbox, spam folder, promotions tab) across different ISPs. While not directly providing 'not spam' feedback, this helps identify deliverability problems.

Expert from Email Geeks explains that if recipients are on a suppression list, they shouldn't be receiving emails in their spam folder that they can report as "not spam."

Expert from Spam Resource explains that Feedback Loops (FBLs) are used by ISPs to provide senders with information about spam complaints, not 'not spam' classifications. They also suggest that ESPs should focus on obtaining explicit consent and managing sender reputation.

Expert from Word to the Wise shares that Complaint Feedback Loops are a key component to monitor and address complaints but that 'Not Spam' data isn't provided. They also explain that ESPs should use FBLs to identify and mitigate sending issues.

Expert from Email Geeks states that ISPs do not directly send data for "not spam" via FBL (Feedback Loop) similar to "report spam", however some ISPs provide summary data, which might include the number of emails delivered.

Documentation from RFC Editor explains that the Abuse Reporting Format (ARF) defines a standard format for reporting email abuse, including spam complaints. While ARF primarily focuses on spam reports, the framework could theoretically be extended to include 'not spam' reports, although this is not commonly implemented by ISPs.

Documentation from Microsoft explains that the Smart Network Data Services (SNDS) provides data about traffic originating from your IP addresses, including complaint rates. ESPs can use this information to monitor their sending reputation with Outlook.com and identify potential issues leading to spam complaints, but it does not provide explicit 'not spam' data.

Documentation from Google explains that the Feedback Loop (FBL) is a mechanism where Gmail provides feedback to senders about which of their campaigns are generating spam complaints. ESPs can use FBL data to identify and address issues causing spam complaints, improving their overall sending reputation.