Craig Hughes wrote:
>I disagree that Paul is an ass. He makes some semi-valid points about
>people's fears, and about how sometimes ISPs misuse or misinstall tools
>on their systems, and thereby negatively impact their users. What I
>mostly disagree with him about is that SpamAssassin goes out of its way
>to make it hard for ISPs to screw up like that, and also goes out of its
>way to minimize false positives as much as practical. We also try and
>give as many ways as possible for ISPs to allow their users to tweak the
>SA settings, or opt out of having their mail processed altogether.
>
>Now having said all that, we must keep in mind that SA is not perfect,
>and needs continuous attention and tweaking to ensure that it can
>satisfy the needs of as many people as possible.
>
>There is no more point in our raving against Paul and others who
>complain about SA than there is in his railing against us. The best
>answer to criticism is not counter-criticism, it's fixing the problem.
>I have received a number of emails from what I consider to be spammers
>railing against problems they perceive with SA (like bogus first
>amendment arguments, etc). I don't think Paul is a spammer at all, as
>far as I can tell, and his arguments are much more coherent and valid
>than many I've seen. I think he may misunderstand some of the ways SA
>works, and certainly is misrepresenting the mindset of those directing
>this project (mostly me, at least until Justin stops loafing around).
>We're not trying to stop people reading their mail. I use SA myself,
>and for my whole family, and I don't want them losing valuable mail.
>False positives are something that need to be planned for, and SA does
>that better than many other spam filters.
>
>We need to be sure that people are educated about why SpamAssassin is a
>good product, not just claim "it's awesome" and then say that anyone who
>criticizes it is a lunatic.
>
Begging to differ, but they guy does show signs. He can't distinguish
between something correctly configured (as an analog, take gasoline in
your car's tank) and assigns it the same value as the same thing
incorrectly configured (say, a Molotov cocktail). Sure, SA's not
perfect. It's not supposed to be. You shouldn't use it to delete
messages. You shouldn't use it to block messages. You should use it to
score messages for delivery. He started by failing to RTFM and proceeds
from there.
--
http://www.pricegrabber.com
"We are smarter individually." -- Larry Niven
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
