On 1/6/2013 11:29 AM, John Levine wrote: >> Don't use spamcop, or use it only with small weight in a scoring system. > > I agree that Spamcop used to be awful, with vast numbers of false > alarms. But since Ironport bought them several years ago, there's > been a nearly complete turnover of staff and it's much better run. > > Take another look. I find its false positive rates down with > Spamhaus' now. > > R's, > John >
Glad it works for you. Please keep in mind the original question of this discussion was how to allow wanted mail blocked by spamcop. The way to achieve that goal is by using a scoring system, as recommended by the spamcop documentation. Clearly the current, vastly improved, false positive rate is still not acceptable for everyone. -- Noel Jones
