On 10/19/2017 02:38 PM, Alex wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 12:32 PM, Alex <mysqlstud...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net> wrote:
Am 19.10.2017 um 16:50 schrieb Alex:
My bayes is trained such that most marketing emails are bayes99. I've
also now removed mcsv.net from the whitelist and see it resulted in 70
messages from mcsv.net being caught today, all of which were from
marketing@ or news@ or similar accounts from sites like
news@firma.agency
well, your users will be grateful when you use a biased bayes and reject
their subscribed newsletters - "bayes is trained such that most marketing
emails are bayes99" is idiotic - the only question for traing is SPAM OR NOT
SPAM and if you are not 100% sure don#t train a sample at all
And yet, it would have stopped the email in question. It also relies
on other ham rules to subtract points or trusted senders to be
whitelisted. I'm also not convinced all of these are opt-in in the
first place.
Third day, third set of false-negatives (20 this time) whitelisted
through mailchimp
https://pastebin.com/6vkxNXxX
I had removed the mcsv.net but forgot mcdlv.net. It's still not being
tagged properly without the whitelisting.
Are all of the recipients the same for the past 3 sets of junk mail?
Are you reporting these to the mailchimp abuse link? I have generally
had good results with the major mass marketers like Mailchimp handling
their rogue customers and blocking the account. If you report this,
then it helps all of us. Blocking things locally only helps your
recipients.
You can also safely unsubscribe those senders and provide feedback to
Mailchimp that you never subscribed to that email. Enough strikes will
get that sender blocked by Mailchimp.
--
David Jones
