Re: SpamAssassin now used to filter BTS Mail
On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 01:19:56AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 10:21:23AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 11:15:04AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > Let us please lower the threshhold for the mailing lists to 4.0 or
> > > even 3.0.
> > not a good idea. it's easy for legitimate mail to get a score of 3
> > or 4. or even 8 or 9.
> Huh? What? Craig Sanders is *opposed* to an anti-spam measure on the
> grounds that it *might impact innocent emails*?
contrary to your bigoted and pig-ignorant opinion, i'm interested in
blocking as much spam as possible with as little 'collateral damage' as
i also happen to know a lot more about spam and spam-blocking techniques
than you do. i know what works, and i know what doesn't work. i also
know what's likely to cause an unacceptable level of false positives.
dealing with the problems that spam causes to mail servers has been a
major part of my job for over 5 years. that's why hardly any spam gets
through my filters, with very few complaints about false-positives from
unlike you, i only comment on subjects i actually know something about.
i don't just open my mouth for the sake of it.
that's why i don't make stupid suggestions like "lower the threshold to
3 or 4".
to recapitulate my response, it is far better to improve the
spamassassin rules so that spam messages score much higher than it is to
reduce the threshold so that nearly every message qualifies as spam.
obviously, it's more important to make lame ad hominem attacks than it
is to think about or discuss the issues.
craig sanders <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Fabricati Diem, PVNC.
-- motto of the Ankh-Morpork City Watch