Paolo Cravero as2594 wrote:
Same goes for who asks to unblock certain messages. They are told they
can decide to have spam pass through (periodical automatic quarantine
unlock, actually). In less than a day they usually beg to restore their
antispam protection (and who cares for that job-unrelat
Ronan McGlue wrote:
> why is the weighting for RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB scores 0 0 0 then 0.007...
>
> I know there is probably a good reason for this low a score but could
> someone explain it to me please as I have one very irate user who
> likes nothing better than to pick holes in spamassassin, which
Craig McLean wrote:
Or just switch off SA scanning of that customer's mail for a day or so,
that should give them an idea of how effective it is... ;-)
I am convinced more and more every day that we should turn off SA once
every two weeks or so for "maintainance" reasons. Then users will stop
com
On Thu, April 14, 2005 12:04 pm, Gray, Richard said:
[snip]
> When we've had to deal with this, I tend to write to write a short email
> demonstrating the effectiveness of the tool (produce some statistics on
> spam stopped) and point out that there is no way to achieve a 100%
> efficiency.
Or ju
Good advice. You might also like to gently remind the user that spam is
essentially an attack by a malicious third party and that you are doing
your best to defend him. It is NOT a bug in the computer system as I
imagine the user likes to think it is.
Raphael
Gray, Richard wrote:
If you felt s
If you felt so inclined, you could get some appropriate ascii art,
(perhaps of a middle finger?) and send that through to him. Wouldn't
count on your having a job much longer tho.
I feel your pain regarding users like that. Some people assume that spam
there is an on/off switch for spam, and the
