On Tuesday, October 12, 2004, 2:01:01 AM, martin krafft wrote: > also sprach Jeff Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.10.12.1030 +0200]:
>> It's generally considered poor practice to apply spam filters >> to spam discussions. > Do you have a reference for this "general consideration"? I am on > plenty of anti-spam lists, and this is the first time I heard > that... It's been mentioned before several times on this list. Otherwise all I can say is that it's standard practice. :-) FWIW, the usual sequence in reporting new (undetected) classes of spam is: 1. Post an instance of it on this discussion list. 2. Someone else feeds it into their SpamAssassin to see if they can duplicate the results (i.e. non-detection). If so then it's considered a real new case that probably should be handled but isn't. 3. One of those people opens a Bugzilla ticket mentioning the non-detection and includes the message(s) as an attachment to the ticket. 4. One of the developers picks up the ticket and codes a solution. 5. Code is tested, approved by other developers, etc. An alternative is that one of the SARE people who write rules that are not officially part of SA yet (AFIAK) to catch the new cases. Jeff C. -- Jeff Chan mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.surbl.org/
