On Mon, May 31, 2004 at 7:59 PM, Marlyse Comte sent forth: >These spammer individuals are really an obnoxious group. Wouldn't mind >frying some of them under Arizona's sun with about 10 scorpions sitting >on their chest ;-) > >Anyway, SpamSieve just ceases to work, in 2 days not one spam message got >sent to the spam folder, all goes into the InTray (as reported earlier). > >Looking at the header of such a message, it has 2 things that seem >specific to those messages: > >they all do not show a from/to/reply/cc/bcc... only subject and date in >the short header. in the past though I had such messages still get filed >correctly under spam. >
>---marlyse > Maybe I'm missing something but I've found that using the built-in filter options got rid of almost all my spam. Given that my spam total is something to behold in its scope and frequency, that's saying something. Now that PM has added its own spam catching utility, I get basically a 98% to 100% capture rate. Given the above stats, I frankly don't see the need for "Spam Sieve" or indeed any other such utility. I even turned off my ISP (Sympatico) supplied spam filtering just to test out the new PM. So far so good. I'm not alone in that sentiment: >My experience has been that once I figured out how to do the spam >filtering, what PowerMail offers built in was all I needed. It did take a >little effort to refine that filtering but I am very pleased with the >outcome and am not including Spam Sieve in my upgrade. > >Midi Why not give PM flying solo a try? If you like, I'll post my filters here for all to dissect and use. BTW, I think your Arizona idea is too soft; smearing them with honey and letting loose a nest of fire ants upon them is more my style. Then to top it off, call them really bad names. :-) -- Tim Lapin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
