On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 09:48:46AM -0400, Warren Togami wrote: > On 10/19/2009 02:31 AM, Henrik K wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 01:57:38AM -0400, Warren Togami wrote: >>> Replying to a private post in public because the results are important. >>> >>> On 10/16/2009 10:22 AM, Anonymous wrote: >>>> http://www.lashback.com/support/UnsubscribeBlacklistSupport.aspx >>>> >>>> It seems to hit a lot, but I don't have a good feel for how reliable it >>>> is. >>> >>> http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/20091017-r826198-n/T_RCVD_IN_UBL/detail >>> Tested the Lashback UBL in the Saturday masscheck. 7.9% of spam and >>> 2.3% ham! This blacklist in its current form is dangerous and should >>> not be used. >> >> Posting to dev.. >> >> Could you (and others) please announce if you are going to add any new net >> rules? >> >> Especially since that list seems to have a public rsync feed, I would >> _really_ like to use it and not add unnecessary traffic to my lousy cable or >> the list. >> > > I intended to test it in only a single Saturday masscheck. Furthermore > it is set to tflags nopublish so it will not be auto-promoted. It seems > that you aren't doing nightly masschecks. > > Where is the problem here?
I'll try to be polite after a long work day. The problem is your understanding. And yes, I haven't done masschecks in a moment, but I will. It has nothing to do with the matter.
