Oh for gods sake you two you just don't get it do you? stop having this attitude that everyone else are morons.
I use hotmail for one reason only to keep my identity anonymous (yes I do know it could be traced back with a certain amount of effort) for logging onto sites I don't wholly trust and I don't want to know my name. As for data mining, that could apply to ANY mail scheme, where is your prove of that statement
bbrunton? Or is that just another made up fantasy of the let's bash MS brigade?
Except that if you are using an email client, there may be no "folder marked 'junk'" for you to see (in any case if using POP3, or if not subscribed via IMAP, as is most often the case).
But I'm not. I'm using hotmail as it's meant to be used, as a web mail system, jf you use it in any other way you invalidate the original concept, and cannot complain if it isn't as you want it.
I see you only use webmail. In that case, the notification is not particularly useful. In fact, I do not get it if I log in via webmail, only when using a mail user agent (e.g., Thunderbird).
100% wrong, for banking etc I use a completely different set up using my IP providers mail system which can be used, and is, either way. And even that puts good mail into the spam folder sometimes.
One way that Hotmail decides what is junk is by harvesting the addresses from the junk mail folders as it deletes them and adding them to the list, so I can, in theory, get sites banned just my moving a properly directed e-mail into the junk folder, but I don't know what number of 'refusals' are required for that to happen. But it's perfectly possible that is what has happened in
Keefs case. It would be interesting to look into why hotmail decided it was spam, after all someone may have used their server as an illicit mail server to send out spam.