--mP3DRpeJDSE+ciuQ
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Alas! Ken Weingold spake thus:
On Mon, Aug 26, 2002, Kai Weber wrote:
+ Ken Weingold [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
=20
Yeah, but with procmail I can send them to
--cvVnyQ+4j833TQvp
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Alas! Michael Leone spake thus:
it's been my experience that the latest SA (v2.31) is much better at=20
distinguishing real mail from spam than earlier
On Fri, Aug 23, 2002, Rob 'Feztaa' Park wrote:
add address to procmailrc. ;-)
Get with the times, Sven! Adding an address to a Spamassassin blacklist
is *so* much easier to maintain than a hairy mess of procmail rules ;)
Yeah, but with procmail I can send them to /dev/null. With
+ Ken Weingold [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Yeah, but with procmail I can send them to /dev/null. With
Spamassassin they go to my spam folder for review.
You can use procmail to filter the spamassasin'ated mails to /dev/null,
too.
| :0
| * ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
| /dev/null
Kai
On Mon, Aug 26, 2002, Kai Weber wrote:
+ Ken Weingold [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Yeah, but with procmail I can send them to /dev/null. With
Spamassassin they go to my spam folder for review.
You can use procmail to filter the spamassasin'ated mails to /dev/null,
too.
I would never do that.
* On 2002.08.26, in [EMAIL PROTECTED],
* Ken Weingold [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would never do that. Sometimes Spamassassin catches real mail as
spam.
If I could be so lucky. Sometimes. Heh.
--
-D.We establised a fine coffee. What everybody can say
Sun
David Champion said:
* On 2002.08.26, in [EMAIL PROTECTED],
* Ken Weingold [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would never do that. Sometimes Spamassassin catches real mail as
spam.
If I could be so lucky. Sometimes. Heh.
it's been my experience that the latest SA (v2.31) is much better at
