> The same argument applies to mail to valid addresses (bingo, bango, ...)
> as well. would you like to use all your mail as a spam corpus? after
> all, you get only 10 out of 120000 messages to these addresses :)
>
Well, bingo DOES like to hear from his mom, SOMETIMES. ;)
I understand your point, but like I previously said... The domain owners
have told me that the incidence of mistypes and use of email addresses
that people think are valid but aren't is so low that they accept that
ones are being tossed and consider that an acceptable loss.
>
> anyway, you'll have to make your mind. N spam messages is not the same
> thing as N probable spam messages, even if the probablity is
> 0.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 (with a finite number
> of 9s). if the probability is not 1 (exactly), then the corpus is
> polluted. It may be statistically good, but that's not always good.
>
Ok, I see where people are coming from on it.
>
> The worst part of this story is that you may be silently (and
> "frivoulously") discarding legitimate mail, which is not very nice (if I
> mistype an address in the said domain, my mail gets dropped and I don't
> have a chance to fix my typo...). Do yourself and others a favour and
> find a way to reject these at smtp time. if you want to trap some spam,
> use carefully selected addresses.
>
The owners are aware this can happen, and in the grand scheme
of things are more happy that they don't have to go through the 120K
emails to delete tham, than worry about "The one that got away".
As mentioned in the previous message, I need to know of a
suitable option for MX hosts. I may have to decide not to be so
vigilant about real errors and turn error copying to postmaster, but
that still won't solve MX's.
Thanks, Tuc
Thanks, Tuc
