On Don, 2010-02-11 at 17:42 -0500, Kris Deugau wrote:
> Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
[...]
> > I proposed the 3rd solution:
> > - repair your spam-detection (change weight/limits, use Bayes,
> > greylistung, etc.) to not generate so many FPs that you actually need
> > an additional workaround.
> > That would actually remove the cause and not fiddle with the symptoms.
>
> :/ Until you have a business customer whose one FP for the year was
> moderately time-sensitive, and which missing out on in time cost them a
> juicy contract.... and guess who they're upset at for spam-tagging that
> one message, never mind how much junk the filter has kept out of their
> inbox?
I was more in "private" area - and the commercial. AFAICT almost every
company I know of plain simply *never* rejects email just because some
tool may think it's got too many spam points.
So for them this is a non-issue anyways.
Bernd
--
Bernd Petrovitsch Email : be...@petrovitsch.priv.at
LUGA : http://www.luga.at
