From: "Res" <r...@ausics.net>
Sent: Wednesday, 2009/December/16 03:18
On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, Christian Brel wrote:
On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 21:10:11 +1000 (EST)
Res <r...@ausics.net> wrote:
On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, Per Jessen wrote:
Christian Brel wrote:
Perhaps the time has come for a fork of Spamassassin where these
commercial considerations are not so obvious?
No need for such drastic measures - it's only a ruleset.
no whitelist should ever become default part of SA
the day it is, is the day I look elsewhere.
Unless yours installed without the -4 and below rule for Habeas, then
you may just want to review that point of view ;-)
I'm the person here who has final say as to who/what gets whitelisted,
I will not ever use ANY third party whitelist service, for reasons as
outlined earler in this thread, just because someone pays to be a good guy
doesnt mean they are.
Res, I am still the person who white lists who I want via the actual
"whitelist" commands. On the other paw, a DNSWL is just another source
of "criteria" by which your email is measured. It's up to you to vary
the scores for yourself. You can vary them in local.cf, in user_prefs,
or any other configuration file you might add to /etc/mail/spamassassin
with a .cf suffix.
Unlather yourself and unwind a little.
{^_-} Joanne
