On Sat, Apr 24, 2004 at 12:32:16AM -0800, John Andersen wrote: # Fact: Razor2 has a less than 15% detection rate when used alone.
I'm sorry, but this is where you are completely, provably, undeniably 100% wrong. razor2-agents has a poor detection rate. We all know that, and it is something that bothers both Vipul and myself considerably. That is a client-side issue with that package of software. Razor2, which is also known as SpamNet and refers to the service which remains open and free, has a ~95% detection rate within a 1st standard deviation of all currently registered users. Indicting the entire system and perpetuating complete nonsense about its backend and trust system on the basis of 1 client of 7 is grossly ignorant. Get your facts straight. # I suggest you check out any survey of effectiveness. There are # plenty on the web. As one of the authors of Razor2 and SpamNet, I think it is you who needs to actually read my email and go do some more research. --jordan ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: The Robotic Monkeys at ThinkGeek For a limited time only, get FREE Ground shipping on all orders of $35 or more. Hurry up and shop folks, this offer expires April 30th! http://www.thinkgeek.com/freeshipping/?cpg=12297 _______________________________________________ Razor-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/razor-users
