LOL, don't take my post the wrong way. It seriously wasn't towards you. It
hit an exposed nerve having to do with something else. 

I understand your concerns about hoaxes. I believe they will get treated
like the virus rules:
http://www.exit0.us/index.php/VirusBounceRules
Which may be created in a cf file, but not in RDJ. And certainly with a big
HUGE warning label about FPs, bayes DB changes, and possibly ear infections.
:) 

--Chris 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: E. Falk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 4:07 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: Scoring Hoaxes
>
>
>I am fully aware of the difference between standard SA and SARE 
>(although I realize my post may have left that open for some 
>confusion - 
>my apologies).
>
>I use and appreciate SARE - the well-developed rule-sets have 
>saved our 
>company an awful lot of time sorting through e-mail!
>
>When a new admin pops up on this list asking for rules, SARE is the 
>first place we send them - wholeheartedly and unreservedly.
>
>What concerns me is that a hoax ruleset has some serious drawbacks 
>(which have already been discussed). It would be a ruleset entirely 
>unrelated to spam, but rather focused entirely on a user's personal 
>mail. False positives would be enough of a concern, but even accurate 
>positives have their problems!
>
>SARE has the right to include whatever rulesets its creators 
>choose, and 
>I would never dream of telling anyone what they could or could not 
>include in their ruleset list. However, I would hope that as a 
>community-oriented resource (which does, in fact, rock) SARE would be 
>responsible about how such a ruleset was provided.
>
>A newbie with AWL, Bayes auto-learning, and a hoax ruleset will very 
>soon see his or her e-mail system degenerate into a massive mess.
>
>I think my main point is this... treating hoaxes as spam is a 
>bad idea. 
>An ideal add-on or improvement to SpamAssassin would be to 
>have some way 
>to deal with unwanted personal e-mails - but spam is bulk and 
>hoaxes are 
>personal. Those two don't mix well.
>
></soapbox> :)
>
>Evan II
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Chris Santerre [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 2:47 PM
>To: 'E. Falk'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: Scoring Hoaxes
>
>I have to make this perfectly clear, and this is not directed 
>at you E.Falk.
>
>
>SARE rulesets are in no way shape or form part of the 
>distribution of SA.
>They are not standard by that means. They are not required to 
>be used with
>spamassassin. No one has to use SARE rulesets in any way shape 
>or form with
>spamassasin to catch spam. SARE rulesets do not come with a 
>blessing, seal
>of approval, or smiley sticker from the developers of SA. SARE 
>rules do not
>go thru the same testing procedure as those rules included in 
>an official SA
>distro. There is no official connection between SARE and SpamAssassin
>distros.
>
>SARE is just SARE
>
>With that all said for reasons that are my own,......SARE ROCKS!
>
>I like the wiki idea. If we get one started, SARE can test it 
>against our
>growing collections of corpa(Corpi, corpora, 
>corcrappymcmuffin, whatever I
>don't care!) against the rules we come up with for hoaxes. 
>exit0.us sounds
>good to me.
>

Reply via email to