On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 2:37 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>> Do you agree that end user recipients should have the final decision
>> about message disposition? And that they probably do want forwarded
>> messages whether or not the forwarder handles them in a way you deem
>> appropriate?
>
> No, because some types of scanning and responses can only be administered
> site-wide by the administrator (i.e. the software configuration) which cannot
> be changed on a per-user basis. Take for an example a message cross- or
> multi-posted to many users (e.g. perhaps from a mailbox dictionary attack):
> Individual users will be unaware of its bulk nature and perhaps ONLY the bulk
> nature will classify it as spam.
So, you can pass your knowledge on to the recipient, leaving the
disposition up to them. For example, I think google is probably as
good as anyone at that sort of bulk-discovery, and yet I regularly
find things they've tossed in the spam folder that are not spam. Why
do you think you have less false positives then they do?
--
Les Mikesell
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above
message, it is NULL AND VOID. You may ignore it.
Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.roaringpenguin.com
MIMEDefang mailing list [email protected]
http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
