On 12/31/2011 6:12 PM, Scott Ferguson wrote:
> Because these lists don't pre-screen posts.
On the contrary. You'd know this if you ever considered how much spam
the list would receive if not for filtering, or, better yet, if you
simply looked at the headers. For instance, the spam filter headers for
your message I'm replying to here:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on liszt.debian.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.8 required=4.0 tests=CAPINIT,IMPRONONCABLE_1,
LDOSUBSCRIBER,LDO_WHITELIST,MURPHY_WRONG_WORD2,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=failed version=3.2.5
X-Original-To: lists-debian-u...@liszt.debian.org
Delivered-To: lists-debian-u...@liszt.debian.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by liszt.debian.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 898EA13A7FBD
for <lists-debian-u...@liszt.debian.org>; Sun, 1 Jan 2012 00:13:15
+0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.debian.org with policy bank en-ht
X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.81 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3
tests=[BAYES_40=-0.01, CAPINIT=3, IMPRONONCABLE_1=1, LDO_WHITELIST=-5,
MURPHY_WRONG_WORD2=0.2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] autolearn=no
Received: from liszt.debian.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (lists.debian.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 2525)
with ESMTP id CYw+46-4Hvtb for <lists-debian-u...@liszt.debian.org>;
Sun, 1 Jan 2012 00:13:08 +0000 (UTC)
X-policyd-weight: using cached result; rate:hard: -6.9
There are no less than 3 layers of spam checking for each message
arriving at the list server.
--
Stan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4effa8e0.60...@hardwarefreak.com
