On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 09:26:34AM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote: > > It's easy to be effective if you don't care about false positives. > Yes, and unless you consider people who either: > 1) are too lazy to confirm > 2) have a philosophical objection to confirming > false positives, then there are no false positives with confirmation systems. Any mail you want to read that gets blocked by a spam filter is a false positive, whoever it may be from. Why're you trying to cloud the issue with inane word games? There are already sensible definitions for these words. Note that, conversely, "Hi, I'm a program and I don't know who you are, and don't trust you, please spend some of your valuable time to overcome my paranoia" can quite reasonably be classed as "mail you don't want to read", especially if it's on behalf of someone who's asking you a favour. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <email@example.com> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.''
Description: PGP signature