On Don, 2010-02-11 at 11:52 +0000, Mike Cardwell wrote:
[...]
> Let me explain this in simple terms.
>
> Normal behaviour:
>
> Spam filtering causes a 5xx rejection. You get an NDR. You either
> contact the user some other way or not at all.
Spam filtering rejects valid non-spam because it mis-identified it as
"spam".
> Behaviour on my system:
>
> Spam filtering causes a 5xx rejection. You get an NDR. You either
> contact the user some other way or not at all. But ... the recipient can
Spam filtering rejects valid non-spam because it mis-identified it as
"spam". Now *I* have to do something to work around *Your* buggy/screwed
spamcheck.
You just have to hope that I´m really, really that interested to my mail
through. If it's an answer per PM to e.g. typical ML mails (like this
here), you would loose.
> still access the email if it's something they were expecting, *and* if
> the sender still wants to contact the recipient they now have an *extra*
> option to make their life easier - they can click a URL and fill in a
> captcha.
>
> So ... my system provides 2 extra little features which makes some
> senders and some recipients lives more easy.
No, you are pushing effort from your side out to others. If you want to
do something for the (valid) sender, fix the FP rate by changing
whatever it needs so that my on-spam mail gets through.
> Neither sender nor recipient would benefit from me removing those
> features from my system.
Of course anyone can do as they think it´s best. But that doesn´t imply
that other think the same.
Bernd
--
Bernd Petrovitsch Email : be...@petrovitsch.priv.at
LUGA : http://www.luga.at
