On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 06:25 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: > On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 10:49 +0100, Pete Biggs wrote: > > > > > Andre, it's better, if we don't reply to spam, to enable easier and > > > > > more > > > > > secure filtering of junk mails. > > > > I think it's not better per se, and I missed the implementation details > > > > of "enabling easier and more secure filtering" here... > > > It could happen that replying to spam will increase the false rejection > > > and/or false accept rate. > > To be honest I think the level of non-caught spam I get just from > > posting to this list (or any public list) far outweighs the noise > > associated with replying to spam here! :-) > > Really? I do not believe this at all - I've been using this same e-mail > address - unobfusticated [[email protected]] - to post to dozens of > lists since the nineties. And the level of SPAM I receive [unfiltered] > is quite low, barely rising to the level of nuisance. > > There have been a couple of case studies - and what I read indicates > there is no correlation to SPAM and posting to public lists. Far and > away, way past anything else, the driver for SPAM found in those case > studies was using an e-mail address to sign up for corporate services / > discounts. Addressing anything else for a 'SPAM problem' is chasing > the mouse in circles around the dragon; it does little but amuse the > dragon.
Sorry for my broken English. I misunderstood Pete. I agree with you Adam. There's more talk about spam, than spam. But as I already said, perhaps talking about spam (from time to time, not always when a spam mail comes through a list) helps to keep the amount of spam low. However, if I should continue this discussion, I'll reply off-list. _______________________________________________ evolution-list mailing list [email protected] To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
