Mark, Thursday, June 12, 2003, 3:50:17 PM, you wrote:
M> I think there are two schools of thought here. I for one prefer to M> deal with spam with my own filters - the absolute last thing I want M> is for some third party tool to decide what mail I get. I want to M> understand EXACTLY how my mail is triaged and why, particularly on M> my critical accounts. I haven't tried SpamAssassin, but programs like POPFile don't decide what mail you get, they only tell you what's spam and what's not. You then decide what to do w/ spam (e.g., move it to a spam folder for review, automatically delete it, auto-reply to the sender, etc.). They also do a *much* better job identifying spam than filters (including low false positives which, IMHO, are far worse than false negatives). The filtering system you presented, if I remember correctly, rejects all HTML email out of hand. This seems kinda draconian to me. I'll bet a lot of those rejections are false positives. POPFile actually reads the HTML and can correctly distinguish spam-HTML from non-spam-HTML. Anyway, that's my (limited) experience. -- Joel Johnstone Using The Bat! v1.53t on Windows NT 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 3 ________________________________________________ Current version is 1.62r | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
