This way you're going to receive only the real spam (that doesn't give a damn about any CAN-SPAM act) and stop all the legitimate newsletters you could easily unsubscribe from... not to mention false positives that just talk about "unsubscribe" for any reason.

The false positives this would generate, in my opinion, outweigh any benefit of having such a filter. I'd rather manually unsubscribe from marketing emails, since, as the author says, the "unsubscribe" functionality is so prevalent.

What, and throw out any legitimate e-mail that contains the word “unsubscribe”? Seems a little heavy-handed to me.

Good idea on the face of it, but do Gmail filters let you create exceptions? There are plenty of useful emails that also have "unsubscribe" in the body.

A bayesian filter is probably sufficient to do this, and will probably do a better job in terms of false positives.

This would catch a lot of things I wouldn't want to block. It doesn't seem like a great solution to me.

I'm OK with some false positives because I think there will be very few in my case. And I can check the Junk folder once in a while to see if there's anything I want to keep. I like it.

I've had this enabled for about 2 months, and its been nothing short of amazing. (picked it up from an HN thread somewhere). Cannot recommend this highly enough.

Yes, there's the occasional false positive, but its surprisingly rare. I pop into my "Unsubscribes" folder every few days to make sure nothing is caught, just like my Spam folder. If there's a false positive, I make a new rule in Outlook.

Seriously, try it. You'll be surprised how nice it is, like a clean apartment.

Sweet, I'll be sure to change our marketing missives to say "remove subscription"!

so if i do this, every list server that i subscribe to will be junked because normally have unsubscribe info in them ...

Won't work with black hat email marketers.

Clever :)