> > Am 15.11.22 um 11:48 schrieb Marc: > >> > >> and i told you that it's useful when a message already passed > multiple > >> hops which flagged it as spam to outright reject it > >> > >> /^Subject: .*\*\*\*\*\*spam\*\*\*\*\* \*\*\*\*\*spam\*\*\*\*\*/ > REJECT > >> Administrative Prohibition (Subject) > > > > A message is either spam or not > > that's not how spam filtering works > > multiple signs of spam leading to marking a message as spam
This is not relevant for the discussion on whether or not to have spamassassin add multiple times '**spam**' to the subject. > > and is marked as spam or not > > good filters don't only mark messages but reject them > > > I don't see how telling me 3 times it is spam has any relevance. > > how comes that you don't see the relevance of the sending system already > thought it was spam and instead jerect it still continued to send the > trash out? This is not relevant for the discussion on whether or not to have spamassassin add multiple times '**spam**' to the subject. > > If you value the information created by multiple servers processing > the message, then this information should be passed differently > > and how do you imagine that in a cahin of indepdenent systems? My first thought would be by adding headers. If I had a chain of 3 servers processing a message by spamassassin. The first 2 would only add scores in the header and the last one would do the calculation upon which is decided to have the message visibly marked as spam for the recipient.
