Re: Proposed change for subscriptions...
Dave Sherohman said:
> You can attempt to convince the listmasters or the project as a whole
> in public without abusing them. (And it would be nice if they also
> replied to you in a calm, levelheaded manner as well...)
Have I not been calm after the initial exchange with Anand? Of course
that isn't a true test since he has been decidedly absent.
> If the public agrees, sure. But it looks to me like this thread is
> pretty much just you against everyone else. Others may have
> approached you in private to say they agree with you, but you don't
> seem to be getting much in the way of public support.
Pst, check the OP. It isn't me. I am a public supporter, not the
instigator.
> Your filters must be extremely good for general mail; my primary
> inbox gets far more spam in a day than my Debian mailbox receives
> (from debian-user and a couple other Debian lists) in a month.
The fact that the Debian headers pretty much skew the SA Bayes score
from a postitive to one of ambivolance is what makes 'em squeak by.
That's why I run Thunderbird's Bayes after SA's chewed on 'em. For some
reason a 50% to SA is a hit on TBird's database.
As for my main inbox, yeah, my filters are quite effective. SA set to
default is pretty shoddy. SA tuned to what SA scores your mail after a
week or two of following the logs can be quite effective. If I recall
correctly, SA is shipped by Debian to mark and pass up to a score of 15.
I 550 anything over 7.5 or so and mark and pass anything 5.0 and above.
So the mail that hits my inbox have to fall below 5.0 on SA. That
happens far more frequently here than any other list I am on.
--
Steve Lamb
Reply to: