On Sunday 15 January 2006 04:08, Stroller wrote: > I'd be very happy with a 95% success rate on spam detection, but > obviously false positives are a Bad Thing.
Never tried it myself, but I've read many articles that say that dspam is a better filter than spamassassin, and can be trained by users simply by instructing them to forward false negatives to some special email address of your choice; after this initial setup, it requires very little maintenance, both for the end users and for the admin. Read something here: http://www.nuclearelephant.com/projects/dspam/ -- Much of the excitement we get out of our work is that we don't really know what we are doing. - Edsger W. Dijkstra -- [email protected] mailing list
