Ten minutes to write. Less time to read.

I have a new email program — new to me, at least — that filters what it believes is junk. The so-called junk is sent to a file, which I can review later, after I’ve read and responded to my legitimate emails.

The trouble is Junk Email isn’t as smart as it thinks. Recently I received some eagerly awaited technical documents from a patent attorney, but Junk Email thought they were spam. On another occasion, Junk Email decided that emails from some employees who work for the same company I do didn’t pass muster.

So, while I appreciate the idea of separating the wheat from the chaff, I cannot depend one hundred percent on Junk Email making the right decision one hundred percent of the time. Which means that I still need to scan the emails’ senders’ names before hitting the ever powerful “Delete for all time” button. I’m not sure what I’ve accomplished, other than enable my necessary email to go to the head of the line.

It’s true that Junk Email captures such brazen solicitations as are sent by Swiss quality watch knock-offs, real estate agents offering financial nirvana, the best in mortgage rates, and — let us not forget — the cheapest Viagra, Ambien, Valium, and Cialis. I’ve also been offered a tip or two on a promising penny stock and urged to verify my bank account numbers . . . at banks where I don’t even have accounts.

So maybe the real purpose of Junk Email is not to decide what is or isn’t junk; rather it’s to raise a flag, so that the recipient takes special note of these emails and makes sure not to respond in a way that enables some shyster to tap into my credit card information or my bank accounts or even my penchant for jewelry. My only suggestion is that the name of the function be Questionable Email instead of Junk.