Hi!
This is a potential if a list will add a site on the basis of ONE spam report. When it takes ten or twenty or more spam reports then sites will get listed. Your Scotts example is an example of how a large number of people would be likely to consider it to be spam and complain. Upon receiving the complaints even a whois lookup to confirm it was Scotts would not absolve the company for their spam run. Their contest site did not ANYWHERE obvious say that you'd be receiving promotional emailings from Scotts as well as contest data. Thus Scotts DID spam. They got listed. Find a better example.
Some peopel actually buy [EMAIL PROTECTED]@ pills. But do we list pill spammers. Yes we do, do people have a problem with that, could be. They still sell those pills so it must be that someone is buying them. Still however most people feel this is spam. And yes its all a matter of definition...
You are suggesting something that may well be valid. What are your testing results from the suggestion? YOU control the scores on your site, in the final analysis. An /etc/mail/spamassassin/ZZZ_local.cf will get parsed last and can override the BL scores. Feed it your score suggestions and report the results.
Especially when you add your own rules and URIBL <tm> to your local.cf. SA is using a weighted and balanced scoring. And yes, per haps OB scoring should be lowered, WS is rather strange, we are internally talking how to get this more inline again.... We have seen an increase of FP there also over the weeks. We dont see the same OB/WS behaviour as Matt mentioned. Its more OB then WS doing the FP ratings. But also there again, its a matter of definition also. Some peoples spam is other peoples ham.
Bye, Raymond.
