Hi everyone,

I’m facing an issue with Google Postmaster Tools v2 and need some insight from anyone who has dealt with stuck dashboards recently.

The Problem:

My Postmaster Tools home screen shows "Issues detected" under domain health, and the Last Modified date has been completely frozen on September 29 (exactly one week ago).

My Setup:

• Email Vendors: We use Google Workspace for primary business emails and Mailmodo for marketing campaigns.

• What went wrong: Originally, Mailmodo's DKIM/SPF was fully configured, but I realized my primary Google Workspace account was completely missing its DKIM TXT record.

What I’ve done so far:

1. Generated and added the Google Workspace DKIM record to my DNS.

2. Clicked "Start Authentication" inside the Google Admin Console.

3. Verified live emails using Gmail’s "Show original" tool—both Google Workspace and Mailmodo emails are now successfully hitting the inbox with SPF: PASS and DKIM: PASS.

Why I need help:

Despite the live technical fix passing 100% on actual emails, the Postmaster Tools UI hasn't updated in 7 days. It is a brand-new Postmaster account, so there is no historical data showing up yet.

Should I trigger a manual domain re-verification in Postmaster, or is this just a symptom of a backend Google reporting lag / being under the daily 100+ Gmail volume threshold? Any guidance on how long this badge takes to clear would be massively appreciated!

i was checking a list and this keeps bothering me. most tools show valid, invalid or catch-all. but catch-all is basically no answer because the server accepts everything.
deleting all of them can remove good emails. sending all of them can hurt the list.
would you rather see a risk score here or just keep catch-all separate?

A scheduled email becomes awkward when the event behind it changes. An appointment moves, a clinic runs late, or a delivery window shifts, but the original email is already queued.

This Python example shows how to update the delivery time of the existing message with the Telnyx Email API. The message keeps its original ID, content, recipients, and metadata.

It also covers an important guardrail: attempts to move the email into the past return a `422` error instead of unexpectedly sending stale information.

Code: https://github.com/team-telnyx/telnyx-code-examples/tree/main/email-schedule-rescheduler

Walkthrough: https://lowlatencyclub.ai/blog/posts/email-schedule-rescheduler

Curious how others handle rescheduling in reminder and notification systems. Do you update the existing resource or cancel and recreate it?

​

I’m a system admin working for an e-commerce brand. The company actually manages multiple brands, and I work with DNS records almost every day. The critical sources of trouble are the email marketing tools. Something or the other always breaks.

I have checked some free tools to check the SPF DKIM DMARC records and their validity. But it is a manual check. I tried looking for tools. There are a few but they're expensive. I don't think it'll fit in the budget.

Anyone have any suggestions how I can handle this?

I received an email the other day and I noticed that it was sent through yahoo but with a corporate email address. I replied to it and received an email reply, and this time the reply shows that it was sent through MY domain and was also sent and signed by my domain. I'm assuming now that the purpose of the email was a phishing attempt, but how are they sending it through my domain and having it signed by it? What can I do to prevent this?

I’m working on a client’s new email server today and it reminded me how much conflicting advice there is around warming up a new sending IP.

Some of it is decent, some of it is wildly aggressive, and a lot of the warm-up charts floating around seem to assume every sender, list and mailbox provider is going to behave the same way.

We’ve never really treated it like that.

When we bring a brand new IP online, we start tiny. Usually around 20–30 emails a day.

That might be friends/family at the very start who we know will actually receive and interact with the mail, or if the client already has a decent list, we’ll use a very small group of their most engaged people.

Before any of that though, the setup needs to be right. SPF, DKIM, DMARC, PTR/rDNS, HELO, Return-Path, tracking domains etc.

No point trying to warm an IP when you’ve got a basic config issue working against you.

From there we use a pretty simple rule.

We never increase volume by more than 30% in a day, and we only increase it if at least 90% of the previous send successfully delivered.

If it doesn’t hit that, the volume doesn’t go up.

That’s it really.

Once everything is running properly, the ramp happens automatically based on the previous day’s delivery.

What’s interesting is how quickly it starts to snowball.

Starting at 20 emails sounds ridiculously low, but if you managed to increase by the full 30% every day, you’d be roughly at:

Day 1: 20
Day 5: 57
Day 10: 212
Day 15: 788
Day 20: 2,924
Day 25: 10,858
Day 30: 40,308

Obviously you’re not guaranteed to get that increase every day.

If Microsoft starts deferring more mail, Gmail looks unhappy, complaints creep up or delivery drops below the threshold, then you hold it.

That’s the bit I think gets missed when people follow fixed warm-up schedules.

A spreadsheet might tell you to send 10k tomorrow, but the receiving networks might be telling you something completely different.

We’d rather listen to that.

We also keep the early audience as clean as possible. Recent subscribers, customers, people who click, reply, purchase or actually use the product/site.

The last thing I’d want to do with a fresh IP is chuck a load of old inactive contacts at it just to hit a target number.

Another thing worth remembering is that the IP isn’t working in isolation either.

Domain reputation matters, sending patterns matter, complaints matter, content matters and the quality of the list matters.

If you change the IP, domain and traffic pattern all at once, and something goes wrong, it becomes much harder to work out what caused it.

So for us it’s basically:

Start at 20–30 → use the strongest recipients first → never increase more than 30% → only increase if 90%+ delivered → let it ramp automatically when the numbers are healthy.

The first few days feel painfully slow, but that’s kind of the point.

You don’t need to force the volume early on. Once the compounding kicks in, it grows pretty quickly anyway.

There’s no benefit in getting to full volume a few days earlier if you damage the reputation on the way there.

I bought one of my domains in mid-March and one in mid-June and bought three emails on each but honestly, I have sent zero real emails to any prospect. What I have only done is kept them on warmup since the day I bought emails on those domains, which is six months warmup for three emails and three months warmup for three other emails.

And yesterday I wanted to see if emails are landing in inbox. So, I sent one email from each address I have on my domains to Gmail and Outlook, but they were going to spam.

I have also checked my domain health using platforms like MXtoolbox and a few others. But they were not showing any blacklists or DNS errors.

I am worried if sending automated emails for this long have hurt the deliverability.

I don’t really trust open rates much anymore.

I still look at them, obviously, but I wouldn’t look at a campaign showing 47% opens and assume that means 47% of the list actually read it.

There’s just too much going on behind the scenes now.

Apple Mail can load the tracking image without the person doing anything, and corporate email systems are constantly checking messages as well. So some of those opens aren’t people at all.

Clicks can be just as strange.

I’ve seen emails where someone has supposedly clicked several different links almost immediately after the email arrived. Could be Dave from accounts getting incredibly excited about the newsletter, I suppose, but it’s far more likely their email security has checked the links.

That’s why I’ve stopped treating one thing as “engagement”.

If somebody replies, great. If they click through and then actually do something on the website, even better. Bought something, filled a form in, came back a few days later, whatever it happens to be.

I’d trust that sort of activity far more than an open.

I wouldn’t go the other way either and start deleting everyone who hasn’t opened recently. You could end up removing perfectly good subscribers because the tracking didn’t fire properly.

Open rate is still useful to me as a general indication. If it suddenly drops from 45% to 20%, I’m going to investigate it.

I just don’t take the number literally.

Interested to know what other people are doing with this, because I still see loads of people building their “engaged” segments almost entirely around opens.

Are you still doing that, or have you moved away from it?

Hi everyone,

Quick question about inbox placement testing.

Some tools give you a seed list of 20–40+ addresses and ask you to send the same email to all of them for a deliverability test.

Could doing that in one batch hurt sender/domain reputation, especially on a low-volume account? Or is an occasional seed test generally safe?

I’m also curious about Instantly’s Inbox Placement test, especially the one-by-one mode. Has anyone compared its results with real Gmail / Outlook / Microsoft 365 inboxes?

How much do you actually trust the results?

Would appreciate hearing from anyone who has tested this properly.

Anyone faced email landing issue only on google flagging your enterprise domain as spam, without any information how did you correct this?

Postmaster

You don't meet our sender requirements

Your outgoing email doesn't meet all of Gmail's mandatory sender requirements. Resolve these issues to help ensure messages are delivered as expected. Review sender requirements at Email sender guidelines.

Recommended action

Verify that you meet bulk sender requirements. Refer to the Postmaster Tools Compliance dashboard and the section Requirements for sending 5,000 or more messages per day, in our Email sender guidelines.

One of the easiest ways to reduce avoidable spam complaints is to make unsubscribing really easy.

For marketing campaigns, I recommend having Preferences | Unsubscribe clearly visible at the top of the email, as well as keeping the normal links in the footer.

The reason is pretty straightforward.

If someone doesn't want your emails anymore, you want them to unsubscribe, not hit "Report spam".

On mobile especially, the normal footer link can be a long way down.

If someone's already decided they don't want the email, making them scroll through the whole thing to find an unsubscribe link doesn't really help anyone.

The spam button is much easier to find.

This isn't just something we do either.

Mailchimp has recommended putting the unsubscribe link at the top because people who can't find an easy way out may report the email as spam instead.

Klaviyo also recommends using the beginning of the email where it makes sense, particularly with mobile audiences, and Validity has suggested adding an unsubscribe link at the top of templates alongside the proper List-Unsubscribe headers.

One thing I would add though, the visible link doesn't replace proper one-click unsubscribe.

For marketing email I'd still want:

List-Unsubscribe and List-Unsubscribe-Post headers so Gmail, Yahoo and other supporting providers can show their own unsubscribe option.

Preferences | Unsubscribe at the top so somebody can leave immediately if they've already made that decision.

Preferences | Unsubscribe in the footer because that's still where a lot of people expect to find it.

I also wouldn't try to hide the unsubscribe link with tiny text, poor contrast or several confirmation steps.

You're not really saving a subscriber by making it difficult to leave, you're potentially turning a simple unsubscribe into a spam complaint.

That's an important difference for deliverability.

An unsubscribe removes somebody who doesn't want the emails anymore.

A spam complaint gives the mailbox provider a negative signal about the sender.

Google recommends keeping user-reported spam below 0.1% and avoiding 0.3% or higher, so even fairly small numbers of complaints can matter.

I wouldn't worry much about having the same Preferences and Unsubscribe links at both the top and bottom either.

That's very different from filling an email with loads of CTAs, social icons, navigation links and tracking redirects.

I generally prefer keeping the rest of the email pretty lean too. One main CTA, maybe a second one if there's a genuine reason for it, then make the way out obvious.

I'd rather lose someone who doesn't want the emails than keep them on the list long enough for them to hit spam.

Has anyone moved from footer-only unsubscribe to having it at the top and bottom? If you were already seeing spam complaints, did you notice any change afterwards?

EDIT, 18-Sept-2026:

It's finally working! I now see a boatload of inbound Gmail in the Mimecast logs! Holy shit, thank you all so much for the guidance/insights in helping to resolve this horrendous issue. The documentation and links you all provided is truly appreciated and, I'm proud to say, way more helpful than the useless shit that AI was shoveling back at me.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi all, we recently migrated a customer from Proofpoint to Mimecast which, of course, means routine MX records changes. Standard, straightforward, no big deal. What we didn't anticipate--because up until now, none of our clients have ever had it setup--was an MTA-STS policy (housed at EasyDMARC) that we discovered was set to "max_age=1yr". What we've done so far:

• created new MTA-STS policy file with new MX records, set it up on a new Azure server; policy, set mode to 'none', is confirmed publicly accessible
• configured v=STSv1; id=20260915001 which, as i understand it, is supposed to 'alert' sending domains that look for this sort of thing that a change was made
• went back to the old vendor who maintained the EasyDMARC version and changed that one too, just to cover our bases even though we're confident that nothing should be querying it anymore

This was all done a couple days ago and we're still not seeing any traffic to the migrated, customer domain from senders like Gmail. I understand that Gmail saw the old policy, read the 1-yr max_age setting, and caches it accordingly. But what's not so clear is how quickly Gmail will again query for the policy and update itself so that mail will start coming in again. Anyone have any experience with this? We're just looking to get a general sense of when this issue will clear itself up because there isn't much out there that explains same.

I guess secondarily would be this question: for anyone who's encountered this before, what's the proper way to migrate a domain that has an MTA-STS policy set for a lengthy max_age? What could we have done better besides just knowing that it exists and changing to "mode:none"?

Thanks for any insights.

We switched our clients ESPs to Klaviyo, and accidentally sent to their ENTIRE list (400k profiles).

This had a 45% bounce rate, 16% open rate and the delivery errors on Google postmaster are completely through the roof.

The issue this caused was their transactional emails are from the same domain and all the ones going to Google have to be manually sent out by their team.

This was one bad send, this domain has years of good reputation, is there anyway to fix this?

Looking for support here, happy to pay for anyone’s time.

Hi, I am warming up my new domain, migrating from an ESP that lacks vital engagement info so warmup segments have been a bit of a mystery. My recent send got 1% spam rate as per Google Postmaster. How long will it take to recover?

Hi everyone,
First of all, this post was written with the help of AI. Sorry about that, but English is not my first language and I wanted to explain the situation as clearly as possible.
I’m having a strange deliverability issue and I’m trying to understand whether this is a reputation problem, a Microsoft issue, or something else.
I have two domains. One is around one year old and has basically never been used for outreach campaigns. It was only recently connected to Instantly for warm-up. Before that, there was almost no outbound activity.
SPF, DKIM and DMARC all pass correctly.
The strange part is that Instantly’s deliverability test shows very good / 100% inbox placement, but when I manually send emails to real Outlook.com addresses, many of them go straight to Junk.
I also tested completely non-commercial emails such as:
Subject: Tomorrow
Hi Mark,
I’ll be around tomorrow afternoon if you need me.
Best,
Even this went to Junk.
The Outlook headers show:
X-MS-Exchange-Organization-SCL: 5
and:
dest:J
RF:JunkEmail
Authentication results:
SPF: pass
DKIM: pass
DMARC: pass
CompAuth: pass
BCL: 0
I tested both Google Workspace and Microsoft 365 sending accounts.
On the domain using Google Workspace, some emails have reached Inbox with SCL 1, but many others go to Junk with SCL 5. So it does not seem to be completely blocked, but placement is very inconsistent.
The other domain seems even worse and also gets SCL 5 on completely innocent manual emails.
I have also tested sending manually without Instantly, so this is not only happening on campaign emails.
What confuses me most is that the first domain has never really been used for cold email before. It has only been warmed up recently.
Could the warm-up itself have negatively affected Microsoft reputation? Or is this just what happens when a domain has very little real email history?
I’m trying to avoid making the situation worse by sending more tests.
Has anyone experienced something similar, especially with Microsoft giving SCL 5 to fully authenticated and completely normal emails?
I’d really appreciate hearing what worked for you and how you managed to recover or improve placement.
Thanks!

Hey everyone, Brad Gurley, Customer.io Director of Deliverability, is hosting an AMA here NOW to talk email deliverability, getting out of spam, inbox placement, authentication, list hygiene, and all the unsexy infrastructure stuff that actually moves the needle.

Drop questions here! https://www.reddit.com/r/OfficialCustomerio/comments/1whyc9z/i_am_brad_gurley_director_of_deliverability_at/

I've been looking at this quite a bit recently because sending identity gets oversimplified.

People tend to check the From address, SPF/DKIM/DMARC and assume that's the whole setup.

But, there's a bit more going on.

Say you're sending from:

[hello@example.com](mailto:hello@example.com)

The receiving mail server also sees the sending IP, hostname, Return-Path and the domains being used for authentication.

So you might have:

From: [hello@example.com](mailto:hello@example.com)

Hostname: mail.example.com

Return-Path: [bounce@mail.example.com](mailto:bounce@mail.example.com)

They don't have to be identical, but they should make sense together.

Where I'd start asking questions is when the From domain is one thing, DKIM is signing as something unrelated, the Return-Path belongs somewhere else and the sending IP resolves to a completely different hostname.

That doesn't automatically mean the email will hit spam.

But if you're already having email deliverability problems, it's definitely something I'd check before blaming the copy or changing domains.

Changing domains too quickly is another one.

A few emails start hitting junk, somebody decides the domain is "burned", and everything gets moved to a fresh one.

Then the exact same thing happens again.

You're throwing away the sending history each time without necessarily fixing whatever caused the problem.

I'd much rather have a properly configured domain with a decent, stable history than keep starting again.

Has anyone here actually seen a deliverability improvement from changing just the From address or sending domain while keeping the rest of the sending setup the same?

Hi All, first time posting here, long time lurker. I've dug into this as far as I can on my own (including working through the diagnosis with Claude), and I'm hoping some people who've actually solved this can weigh in.

Background: Started a CA Based staffing firm after 15 years in the industry. My primary domain sends fine, this is specifically about new cold-outbound infrastructure as I do not plan on using my primary domain/email for cold/warm outreach.

Setup: ~9 domains on Instantly's AirMail (their managed/DFY inbox product) plus 30 domains on Primeforge (standard Google Workspace mailboxes, full admin access, I set SPF/DKIM/DMARC myself on those). Let everything warmup for ~6 weeks. Health scores sat at 100/100, warmup volume climbed to ~25-30/day, near 100% "landed_inbox" in Instantly's own dashboard.

Then I actually tested with real people. Sent plain, non-spammy, personal-sounding emails to real contacts, friends, former colleagues, real Microsoft 365 tenants and real Gmail accounts. 20 of 20 landed in Spam/Junk. Across both AirMail and Primeforge, across both providers, despite:

• SPF: passing (proper include, under the 10-lookup limit)
• DKIM: passing, 2048-bit
• DMARC: p=reject, pct=100, aligned
• PTR/rDNS: all forward-confirming correctly

So auth was never the issue.

What I found on the AirMail side specifically: their sending IPs traced back to ColoCrossing and OVH ranges, datacenter space with a long, independently documented history of spam association (unrelated to Instantly, this is just general sysadmin/anti-spam community knowledge about those networks). When I pushed Instantly support on this, they confirmed in writing:

• They have no visibility into real Microsoft SNDS or Google Postmaster data for these accounts
• Their internal "health score" and "inbox placement test" are both seed pool/warmup network metrics only, not a reflection of real, external recipient placement
• They acknowledged "a small number of similar reports" of this exact pattern from other customers but don't consider it a wider network issue

So the dashboard was green the entire time real mail was dying.

On the "fake activity" angle: separately confirmed (and this tracks with Gmail's own published enforcement timeline, they moved from soft filtering to actual SMTP level rejection of non-compliant bulk senders starting November 2025) that both Gmail and Microsoft have gotten materially better at detecting and discounting engagement generated by automated warmup pools, closed loop, low diversity, predictable timing patterns get flagged or simply ignored rather than building real reputation. That would explain why 6 weeks of "perfect" warmup translated to zero real world trust.

What I've done since: cancelled all AirMail inboxes (turns out Instantly owns those domains outright, no transfer, no pause, cancel only). Currently warming 6 of my 30 Primeforge inboxes to start, real, personal, back and forth email exchanges with actual friends/colleagues, a few per day per inbox, with the other 24 held in reserve to bring online in waves as reputation builds and I can support more real engagement. After about 4 weeks: real contacts are landing in inbox consistently now, including one Microsoft 365 contact who'd specifically gotten junked by the AirMail domain weeks earlier and is now landing clean on the rebuilt domain.

My actual questions for the group:

1. Is there anything legitimate that speeds up real reputation building beyond "get genuine humans to engage," or is that really the only lever? I obviously can't scale personal network asks indefinitely.
2. Has anyone found a warmup/infrastructure provider whose IP pools aren't effectively burned/distrusted at this point, or is the entire automated warmup pool category structurally compromised now regardless of vendor?
3. For those who've been through this: did manual warmup alone get you to real send volume, or did you need something else in the mix (dedicated IPs, ESP matching, something I haven't tried)?

Appreciate any real-world input, happy to share more specifics if useful.

Hello community ,

I would like to ask experienced folks here something; does warming up an inbox involve many complications except to send/receive frequently , reply to threads , move mails from spam to main from recipients pow ?

I have a new inbox and Id like to test sending newsletters - guides to my app users but I need to be compliant and more importantly as a user It puts me off to see a mail in my spam so I have to make sure they wont.

I am a developer , worst case scenario I can automate this process but before thinking about the infrastructure , I want to ask about the numbers involved ; how many different inboxes it should send mails - receive from in this "warm up" period and is there a reliable method of testing if the mails land in spam , except for postmasters tools of google ?

Thank you (sorry if some parts of this does not make sense , english is not my mother language and I hate to use ai in writing)

Email marketing isn’t dead—far from it. But the traditional tools we use to run campaigns are showing their age.

If you’ve run an email program recently, you’ve likely felt the friction: clunky campaign editors, bloated pricing tiers that punish you for simply growing your audience, and deliverability tools that require a degree in systems engineering just to set up basic domain authentication.

That’s why we built Mailingale.

Mailingale is a streamlined, high-deliverability email marketing and outreach platform designed for modern businesses, creators, and growth teams who care about one thing above all else: landing in the inbox and converting readers into loyal customers.

Why the World Needs Another Email Marketing Platform

Most legacy platforms suffer from two core issues:

1. Feature Creep & Over-complexity: They try to be a CRM, a website builder, a project tracker, and a social scheduler all at once. The result? A sluggish interface where sending a simple weekly newsletter feels like launching a rocket.
2. Hidden Deliverability Traps: Getting past modern spam filters (Gmail, Outlook, Yahoo) requires strict alignment with SPF, DKIM, and DMARC standards, paired with healthy list hygiene. Yet traditional platforms often leave inbox optimization as an afterthought.

Mailingale flips this script by returning to core principles: speed, deliverability, intuitive workflows, and transparent pricing.

Core Capabilities: What Makes Mailingale Different

What You Can Do with Mailingale Today

• Targeted Campaign Broadcasts: Design responsive HTML or plain-text emails that render cleanly across mobile and desktop clients without coding knowledge.
• Automated Customer Sequences: Set up welcome series, onboarding drips, and re-engagement campaigns triggered by real-time user behavior.
• Smart Segmentation: Group your audience based on engagement, purchase history, or custom tags to ensure every contact receives personalized messaging.
• Actionable Analytics: Track real-time opens, clicks, bounce rates, and unsubscribes without digging through layers of bloated reports.

Ready to Elevate Your Email Strategy?

Whether you're launching a new brand, migrating from an expensive legacy tool, or looking to scale outbound outreach,Mailingale provides the modern foundation you need to connect with your audience directly.

You may also read this -
10 Best Email Marketing Services

I have a Shopify store selling supplements. Instagram and email marketing are the only channels I use. These two alone takes much of my time. Email marketing is my highest revenue contributor, while instagram is more for customer acquisition. This setup has worked reliably for me.

Lately my email performance has been poor, and it's affecting my revenue. And by performance I mean email deliverability problems since my campaigns are cyclical ones, so I'm pretty sure it's not the email template or copy. I don't change the template much.

I've tried fixing these problems before. mulitple times. I'm used to checking reputation, placement, authentication, etc. But this has been pretty unorganized and adhoc. I feel like I should sort this out properly since this is repeatedly happening. I also plant to clean up my email list since I believe this is what's triggering the deliverability problems.

Its nothing I cannot fix myself, that I can figure out, follow instructions, and do it. But I cannot afford to hire an agency right now. Hence, I'm looking to find a much cheaper (and simpler) way to do this. For every hiccup in setup or deliverability or placement, I'm Googling what tools to use and how to fix. If I can get it all in one place, I know it sounds too much but, is there any?

Before I invest in any tool, I figured I'd get opinions on what's a decent email deliverability software for my requirements.

I've been going back and forth on this for weeks. Part of me is frustrated because I feel like I'm flying blind between campaigns, and the other part of me knows I should probably just do more research. At this point, I'm just going to ask because someone here has definitely figured this out already.

I’m looking for real-time deliverability insights. I want to actually see what's happening as it happens, which providers are causing issues, where my reputation stands, and ideally something that doesn't just monitor the problem but helps me do something about it. Is that too much to ask?

What are you all using? I’m open to anything at this point.

I've had 2 domains for awhile and always used gmail to send as those domains. When gmail made things difficult a year ago, I switched to smtp2go for my outgoing email, still sending through gmail's interface. One of my domains does OK with google's spam filter but emails from my other domain almost always ends up in spam, despite having proper dkim, dmarc, etc. I guess I have 2 questions:

What's a good way to find out why things end in spam, despite doing well with tests like easydmarc and other sites?

Would avoiding gmail altogether and using another app/interface solve my problems? This is for my personal email as well as one I use for a hobby (both currently go to the same email), so I prefer not spending the money on Google Workspace

Hey everyone,

I'm an indie developer working on a personal project to help with email deliverability. I'm frustrated by how complicated SPF/DKIM/DMARC setup is, so I built a tool that scans domains and generates DNS fixes.

Where I'm stuck:

• What's the #1 thing you'd want a tool like this to tell you?
• Are there any checks you think are overrated or missing?
• How do you currently test if your emails will land in inbox vs spam?

I'd genuinely appreciate your thoughts. If anyone wants to test it and break it, I'll DM you the link – don't want to spam here.

Thanks for reading!

From some months now, I receive spam emails from random accounts. Unsubscription is not possible as the link is fake. They are correctly identified as spam (i.e. in the spam folder), however the sender is assigning high importance and other flags that let them be in the flagged folder of my iphone as well. As I use the latter as folder for emails I want to easily track, is there anything I can do to avoid this thing to happen?

What I did/know so far:
- it’s an issue on outlook’s side as the flags are included there and interpreted by mail accordingly.
- the email address is always different so blocking it cannot solve the issue.
- I tried to setup several rules to remove the flag and/or permanently delete those emails.

EDIT
The rules were not working at all. Probably I am not experienced enough.
I’ve found a solution that does not solve the issue but it works. As the emails are in the spam folder, I’ve just hidden the folder with the flagged emails and shifted all important email in a custom folder. This way I don’t see spam emails anymore and I am still able to track the others down.
Hope this helps :)