You can’t stop it, but you can take steps to avoid getting more.
Imagine a world without spam. What a nice, quiet place, right? Many services would be more efficient and cost less.
Unfortunately, that utopia is not to be. Spam exists and can’t be completely prevented.
But you can take steps to prevent getting more spam.
Stopping spam
You can’t stop spam. To reduce the amount of spam you’ll get in the future:
- Do not respond to or act on spam.
- Do not unsubscribe from spam.
- Do not enable images on spam.
- Don’t give your email address to the wrong person.
- Don’t post your email address publicly.
- Trim email before you forward it.
- Avoid sending to friends who will forward your email address on.
The spam folder is the system working
I occasionally get questions from folks who complain about the massive amounts1 of spam they get. When I dig deeper, they’re complaining about the spam in their spam (or junk) folders.
Folks, that’s the system working as intended. Spam is automatically routed to the spam folder, and non-spam (sometimes referred to as “ham”) is delivered to your inbox.
Spam filters may make mistakes in one direction or another from time to time, but the goal is that all the spam you get lands in the spam folder, where you never need to look at it — or at least not look at it very often.
There’s no way to stop spam. You can only deal with it in a way that makes it less of an issue when it arrives.
But there are steps you can take to avoid getting even more spam than you already do.
Help keep it going by becoming a Patron.
Preventing more spam
Many people unknowingly ask for spam in various ways. Each of those ways causes even more spam to head your way.
Do not respond to or act on spam
This might be the #1 way people ask for more spam. By responding to spam (even to complain), you’re telling the spammer that they’ve found a real live email address that someone reads. They’ll take that as a sign to send you more spam, not less.
Clicking on a link in the spam can do exactly the same thing. Worse is making a purchase based on a spam message. Besides being a risk for so many other reasons (like fraud), it tells the spammer, “We got us a live one!”
Do not unsubscribe from spam
Spam often includes an unsubscribe link. Don’t click on it. You were never “subscribed” in the first place. The unsubscribe link exists only to fool you into confirming to the spammer that you’re real and that you read your email. Mark it as spam instead. (Only use the unsubscribe link to sever ties to emails you did subscribe to in the first place.)
Do not enable images on spam
The reason pictures are disabled by default on spam-filtered email, and often on legitimate email by default, is that the mere act of displaying that image can tell a spammer that they have a real email address.
Don’t give your email address to the wrong person
This is one reason many people have more than one email address or create one-time or throw-away email addresses.
Many companies share their email lists with others or even sell the list of their customers’ email addresses. Reputable companies do not, so you can keep shopping at Amazon and the like, but be careful when dealing with a company you’ve never dealt with before.
Consider creating and using a different email address for this purpose. Again, so-called throw-away email addresses are perfect for this, as you can simply stop paying attention to them if they start getting too much spam.
Don’t post your email address publicly
If your email address is visible on a public webpage, then spammers likely have it. They have been known to harvest email addresses from webpages because they’re more likely to be real, active email addresses than ones they just make up.
A good example that you can easily avoid is noting your email address within a comment you post on sites like Ask Leo!. While I proactively remove those email addresses, not all sites do. The more you do so, the more likely spammers are to find your email address and send even more spam your way.
It’s a little more difficult to control mailing lists with public online archives. If anyone can see the archives, and the archives include full email addresses, then spammers will be there as well. The best solution is to use a dedicated email address for such a mailing list and abandon it if it starts getting too much spam.
Trim email before you forward
If you get an email you want to forward to someone else, consider trimming (deleting) the email addresses contained in the message you’re about to send. A forward usually includes the full email address of the original sender as well as the email addresses to which it was sent. Sometimes those messages make it into the hands of spammers, who harvest the information.
Not only will you get less spam, but it’s just good etiquette that results in an easier-to-read email and maintains the privacy of others.
Avoid sending to “that friend”
Along those same lines, if you have a friend who regularly forwards emails without trimming email addresses, think twice about sending them the latest joke or viral message. You can’t control what they do (no matter how much you might cajole them), but you can keep your email address out of the loop by not starting the chain.
Starting over
One approach some people take to dealing with spam is to start over: to create and switch to a completely new email address.
While that attempt is ultimately doomed — eventually every email address will get spam — it’s a perfect opportunity to ensure you’re taking the steps above religiously. This will at least reduce the amount of spam the new account gets (or at least delay the arrival of the eventual spam tidal wave).
Do this
Understand that spam is inevitable, but take the steps above to avoid “asking” for more.
Choose an email provider with a good spam filter and learn to use it. When spam arrives in your inbox, mark it as spam and move on.
Here’s one place you can use that email address safely, though: Subscribe to Confident Computing! Less frustration and more confidence, solutions, answers, and tips in your inbox every week.
Podcast audio
Footnotes & References
1: Different people have different definitions of massive. I routinely get around 100 spam messages per day, with occasional peaks to well over 300. Some consider that massive. I consider it routine.
What email providers provide good, better, best spam filters
Leo has recommended Gmail for havng the best spam filters. I’ve had great results with Proton Mail’s spam filter.
What should a person do who wants to subscribe to Usenet? (Remember Usenat? It still exists!)
Messages posted to Usenat are required to have a return E-Mail address…
Use a dedicated throwaway email address.
My ISP is a small, not national, company which has done a good job with spam for over 20 years. In recent weeks, however, I’ve been getting a lot of SPAM that it is not catching. I move it to the SPAM folder. Email in that folder, however, count toward my quota limit. My question: If I then delete it from the SPAM folder, is it still “registered” somewhere as SPAM or is that desgnation removed when moved, theoretically allowing it to come back again?
The spam filter is updated the moment you mark it as spam. You can and should immediately clear your spam filter, at least, daily.
I recently sent the following comments to the powers to be – individually- at Google / Gmail, I am still waiting for an official response.
Subject: Request for Transparency and Stronger User Controls Regarding Harmful and Unrequested Email
Dear Google Leadership:
I am writing as a long‑time Gmail user who continues to receive a high volume of obscene, phishing, fraudulent, and otherwise harmful email every day. These messages are not borderline cases — they are explicit scams, impersonations, and adult content that should never reach a user’s inbox.
For individuals like me, the ongoing exposure to obscene, fraudulent, and predatory email is not merely an inconvenience — it affects our psychological well‑being, our sense of safety, and our trust in the platform. Being forced to repeatedly encounter compromising content is morally exhausting, and the constant vigilance required to avoid scams creates unnecessary stress. A single mistake, especially in a moment of fatigue, could lead to substantial financial loss. This is a real and preventable risk that Gmail should not be imposing on its users.
Gmail currently makes it extremely difficult for users to fully block categories of harmful or unwanted mail. The tools available are limited, inconsistent, and ineffective against high‑volume spam networks. Users cannot simply opt out of entire categories of obscene or fraudulent content, even when the harm is obvious.
I previously raised many of these concerns in correspondence addressed to the CEO and other senior leaders, but my message went unanswered. The lack of acknowledgment only reinforces the need for transparency and meaningful action, especially as the volume and severity of harmful email continues to grow.
This design choice has consequences. Whether intentional or not, Google financially benefits from the current system. When users are forced to continue receiving unwanted mail, it increases overall email volume, engagement, and data flow — all of which support Google’s advertising‑driven business model. The lack of effective user controls creates a situation where harmful content persists while Google continues to profit from the ecosystem surrounding it.
Google’s recent deployment of RETVec demonstrates that the company has the technical capability to dramatically improve spam detection. RETVec has already increased Gmail’s spam‑classification accuracy, reduced false positives and false negatives, and improved detection of evasive techniques such as glyph substitutions, mixed‑alphabet spam, and encoded adult content. These results show that Google can make substantial improvements when it chooses to.
Yet despite these advances, Gmail still does not allow users to block entire categories of obscene, fraudulent, or harmful content. This gap between technical capability and user protection raises legitimate questions about priorities and incentives.
Recent reporting about Meta profiting from scam‑linked advertising shows that incentive misalignment is not hypothetical — it is a documented industry problem. This makes transparency from Google even more essential.
I respectfully request that Google:
1. Strengthen Gmail’s filtering of obscene, fraudulent, and harmful content, ensuring that users are not repeatedly exposed to compromising material.
2. Provide users with the ability to block entire categories of unwanted mail, including adult content, impersonation attempts, and financial scams.
3. Disclose whether Gmail’s current filtering limitations create revenue‑positive outcomes for Google, and whether internal metrics track the volume of harmful mail that reaches user inboxes.
4. Clarify what steps Google is taking to ensure that business incentives do not undermine user safety.
Gmail is a critical service for millions of people. Users deserve both protection and control — not a system where harmful content is allowed to persist because the platform benefits from the status quo.
I look forward to your response and to seeing Google take meaningful steps to address this issue.
Sincerely, Luis
You’ll be waiting until Hell freezes over. Don’t expect companies like Google, Microsoft, or any company that doesn’t offer customer support to pay attention to people’s communications.
I understand the sentiment, but accepting that “nothing will ever change” is exactly why these problems persist. Large platforms don’t improve because users stay silent — they improve when people document issues, escalate them, and make those gaps visible to the wider community.
I’m not expecting a personal reply from Google. I’m creating a public record, sharing it with expert organizations, and contributing to the broader conversation about user safety. Even if one individual can’t force change alone, collective pressure starts with someone taking the first step.
Complacency guarantees nothing changes. Documentation and persistence at least create the possibility.
Hi When you say do nothing if you open a spam email apart from look, does that include forwarding? In the UK the government has an anti phishing email where it asks you to forward suspect emails. I have been forwarding spam to the government and then deleting the spam, does the spammer know I’ve forwarded the email?
Am I Wasting My Time Reporting Scam and Spam Emails?
Short answer: Yes.
I’m retired, so my spam solutions may not work for everyone. I start by checking the source of any email message entering my In Box.
If the message is from a known source that sends me advertisements (such as Amazon), I look at the content to see if there’s anything I want, then I delete the message.
If the message comes from an unknown or unfamiliar source, I first look to see if I’m identified by name. If I’m identified by the wrong name, I send it to my spam folder. If the message identifies me by name, I check the content to determine whether it’s medically related, and if so, I contact my health care provider’s account manager to confirm that the sender’s contracted with them. I take this step because my current Health Care provider is reorganizing, and I’m getting messages from many third parties that I haven’t previously dealt with. For any other such messages, if they appear to be advertising, I send them to my spam folder, and if not, I simply delete them. Finally, if a message comes from a known, trusted source (friends and family), I contact the sender to confirm they sent the message. For any remaining messages in this category (known, trusted), I may read the message, but I never click any hyperlink without carefully examining the URL. It must always correspond with the label, and begin with the sender’s base address (For BestBuy it should begin with ‘https://bestbuy.com/’, or ‘https://www.bestbuy.com/’). If I can’t decipher the URL of any hyperlink in any message, I simply DON’T Click!
Essentially, I view anything and everything related to, or coming from the Internet with skepticism, in particular email messages and any hyperlinks I encounter.
This is what has worked for me for many, many years, and hopefully it contains something that helps others,
Ernie