Michael, et al -- ...and then Michael Stenner said... % % On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 03:41:01PM -0500, David T-G wrote: % > % Razor wants all spam that is VERIFIED BY A HUMAN to be spam.* So yes, % > % > So even if SA says that it racks up an 11.7 I should send it in, either % > 'cuz I got it at all or 'cuz the SA razor test (is there one?) didn't % > catch it. Hokay. % % There are a lot of people who just use razor by itself. They like it % when you submit those :)
Good :-) % % > So now how far back should I go? I have *lots* of old, confirmed % > spam (see my other thread; I have lots of confirmed not-spam, too). % > Is anything over, say, an hour old useful? % % Sure. % % 1) internet propagation can be weird % % 2) how long does it take to send that 20kB spam 10,000 times over % dialup? (answer: 8 hours) Well, OK, an hour was probably the wrong number. But I shouldn't probably shouldn't bother the razor with months-old spam since the messages are likely to have been tweaked since then, right? % % 3) some people run the razor check as they sit down to read the mail, % not when it arrives at their server Heavens :-) % % -Michael % -- % Michael Stenner Office Phone: 919-660-2513 % Duke University, Dept. of Physics [EMAIL PROTECTED] % Box 90305, Durham N.C. 27708-0305 Thanks & HAND :-D -- David T-G * It's easier to fight for one's principles (play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/ Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg!
msg05046/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
