Well, I guess I'm a bit of an exception in the world,
a computer geek with English and Film degrees. That
probably explains a few things. I like to think I
have a wide variety of interests rather than being
fluffy.
If it seems worthwhile, I would be happy to set up an
account on my machine and
> I guess it depends on what the focus is here, do you
> want something that works great for a largely US based
> group with mostly technical email or is there a wider
> goal? Do you go for 100% spam catching with some
> false positives or do you miss some because you never
> want a false positiv
I did email Chris Prillo of Lockergnome and tried to
enlighten him. His response basically was that he was
mad that people were using something that they didn't
know how to use and it was too powerful. Ok fine, but
I think it is misdirected anger, but I see why he is
mad since his newsletter, wh
On Mon, 18 Mar 2002 20:38:52 -0700
"Kerry Nice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I saw in the Lockergnome newsletter I received today, Spamassassin was
> slammed big time. I do see his point though. Does SA really do that
> great of a job with newsletters and journals?
Lets just say that "Boogie
On Tuesday 19 March 2002 12:57 pm, Craig Hughes wrote:
> Actually, something I've noticed is that otherwise legitimate-looking
> email frequently gets tripped up by an ad tacked on the bottom of the
> mail -- this happens with mailing lists trying to support themselves,
> but also with things lik
00 PM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] SA's performance with mailing lists
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 12:57:30PM -0800, Craig Hughes wrote:
> | On Tue, 2002-03-19 at 06:22, dman wrote:
> | > Just for elightenment, take a look at the newsletters again. Do they
> | > sound at all similar to spam m
On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 12:57:30PM -0800, Craig Hughes wrote:
| On Tue, 2002-03-19 at 06:22, dman wrote:
| > Just for elightenment, take a look at the newsletters again. Do they
| > sound at all similar to spam messages you've seen? SA is only a text
| > processor, not an actual human, so it can
On Tue, 2002-03-19 at 06:22, dman wrote:
> Just for elightenment, take a look at the newsletters again. Do they
> sound at all similar to spam messages you've seen? SA is only a text
> processor, not an actual human, so it can only do so much. There are
> some legitimate mails that are so simil
On Monday 18 March 2002 07:38 pm, Kerry Nice wrote:
> I saw in the Lockergnome newsletter I received today, Spamassassin was
> slammed big time. I do see his point though. Does SA really do that
> great of a job with newsletters and journals?
We could take out the rules that get triggered ofte
Behalf Of
> Kenneth Chen
> Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 11:39 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [SAtalk] SA's performance with mailing lists
>
>
> Well there you go! An real-life example of the best of both worlds. :)
> Sounds like a great set-up; are you filte
On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 08:38:50AM -0800, Kenneth Chen wrote:
> Well there you go! An real-life example of the best of both worlds. :)
> Sounds like a great set-up; are you filtering all mail through procmail
> first -> spamassassin?
>
> I'm curious as to what ISPs would use for that purpose...
Well there you go! An real-life example of the best of both worlds. :)
Sounds like a great set-up; are you filtering all mail through procmail
first -> spamassassin?
I'm curious as to what ISPs would use for that purpose...
Kenneth
---
Kenneth Chen
Unit Supervi
to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Kenneth Chen
> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 10:49 PM
> To: Kerry Nice
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] SA's performance with mailing lists
>
>
> I believe that if an ISP is going to use SA for their mailserver, they
> sho
> Is this just the journals I read or does this seem like a really big
> problem to others? I know these can be whitelisted (and in my case,
> procmail takes care of them), but if an ISP, for example, is going to
> use SA, lots of people are going to get legitmate mail filtered and will
> have to
rom: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Kerry
> Nice
> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 10:39 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] SA's performance with mailing lists
>
>
> I saw in the Lockergnome newsletter I received today, Spamassassin was
On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 08:38:52PM -0700, Kerry Nice wrote:
| I saw in the Lockergnome newsletter I received today, Spamassassin was
| slammed big time. I do see his point though. Does SA really do that
| great of a job with newsletters and journals?
...
| Is this just the journals I read or
I believe that if an ISP is going to use SA for their mailserver, they
should really be careful what threshold they set their SA configuration.
Anything below 10 is playing with fire, IMHO. For my own system I use
7.0, but due to my small number of users I can also go through the spam
mailbox and
I saw in the Lockergnome newsletter I received today, Spamassassin was
slammed big time. I do see his point though. Does SA really do that
great of a job with newsletters and journals?
Just as an exercise, I ran though my journals folder though SA and it
wasn't pretty. These are all mailing
18 matches
Mail list logo
