> for eliminating spam. Please do not contaminate the Razor database > with the output of other methods, thereby inflicting upon me *your* > preferences for spam detection.
nitpicking, but by using razor, you're already subjecting yourself to the preferences of others, aren't you? there's not a lot of difference between a bot which reports 98% spam and 2% false positives, and a human who reports 98% spam and 2% mailing lists which they decide they don't like after all. > Thinking back to the "laziness" excuse, if you want to bulk-report the > messages that have been caught by your automated systems, why can't > you do so by inspecting the spam-mailbox for false positives, deleting > them, then dumping the whole mailbox into razor-report? i'll second that. -- .-----. |l~~~l| [EMAIL PROTECTED] (CARRIER LOST) <http://www.visi.com/~drow/> |l___l| ----------------------------------------------------------------- /+++++\ "The first 90% of a project takes 90% of the available time. ~~~~~~~ The remaining 10% takes another 90%." ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: Influence the future of Java(TM) technology. Join the Java Community Process(SM) (JCP(SM)) program now. http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?sunm0003en _______________________________________________ Razor-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/razor-users
