On 31 Jan 2002 at 1:39, Charlie Watts wrote: > Messages are already tagged with numbers indicating spammishness. Is > adding "Maybe" and "Probably" just helpful because it makes filtering > easier? It really isn't adding any information. > > I find that a decent bit of my spam is in the 5-10 range anyway. Which is > indeed where all of my false positives are, too. > > Checking three folders for false positives wouldn't be any faster than > checking one is now ... > > From my point of view (I know others use SA differently) SA should just be > a filter. Pass messages through it for labeling. It shouldn't be > auto-reporting things or doing delivery. There are already tools to do > those things.
SpamAssassin/MTA integration methods which allow the spam status of a message to be determined during the SMTP conversation provide the opportunity to bounce the mail before it's accepted from the originating server. Where would you set a benchmark for rejection, or would you even consider that? Many people are already rejecting mail through the use of blackhole lists. IMO, SpamAssassin is more accurate than such systems; many of the open relay based lists especially are prone to rejecting *some* legitimate mail. I've been considering setting up my server to mark spam if it's above the usual threshold, but reject it outright if it's above some higher threshold. ---- Nels Lindquist <*> Information Systems Manager Morningstar Air Express Inc. _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
