Christian Brel wrote:
> The point comes back to this and it has *not* been answered sensibly;
> WHY DOES SPAMASSASSIN DEFAULT INSTALL WITH A NEGATIVE SCORING RULE THAT
> FAVOURS A COMMERCIAL BULK MAILER. Namely the negative score for Habeas?
>
This point has been answered. SA ships with that rule because the rule
was useful and the score made sense at the time. It obviously needs to
be re-addressed to take into account the changes that have occurred with
the whitelist, and this is already being done for the next SA release.
> Ship it with a 0.0 score, the problem goes. Leave it as it is and it
> smells corrupt. It's that old addage. If it looks corrupt, and it
> smells corrupt, it's probably corrupt.
>
> Perhaps the time has come for a fork of Spamassassin where these
> commercial considerations are not so obvious?
I really don't care who creates the whitelists and blacklists that SA
uses. The only thing that really matters is how effective they are. If
a blacklist blocks spammers without blocking too many legitimate mails,
use it. If a whitelist allows legitimate mail without sending through
too many spams, use it. Even lists that have a fair number of false
hits are useful in SA -- just with lower scores.
("legitimate mail" in this context means mail that the end user wishes
to receive...bulk or otherwise)
--
Bowie
