I don't worry about resource issues with a dedicated box. But I still
feel that a single solution ought to be adequate.
Peace,
Gene
On Aug 2, 2008, at 9:12 PM, "Rick Beckman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Running WP-Spamfree means that Akismet doesn't have to ever touch the
majority of spam. While it may not make a huge difference, the
communication
of spam to Akismet and the response back could amount to significant
bandwidth/processor usage on less robust hosts. WP-Spamfree -- and
other
solutions, like Bad Behavior -- help squelch spam so that further
filtering
is used far less often.
--
Rick Beckman
http://rickbeckman.org/
http://fellowship-hall.com/
On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 12:06 AM, Matt Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In my sample of 12,000 spam comments Akismet has missed less than
10. As
far as I can tell running another spam filter could only lead to
false
positives.
Gene Steinberg wrote:
On Aug 2, 2008, at 8:41 PM, Rick Beckman wrote:
Running both WP-SpamFree & Akismet isn't a waste; if anything,
it's smart
or
at least smarter. Spam free blocks a lot of spam, but if it comes
from a
human, it's pretty ineffective. In that event, Akismet is there
to catch
what gets through.
--
Rick Beckman
http://rickbeckman.org/
http://fellowship-hall.com/
What about the reverse?
What is Akismet missing?
Peace,
Gene
_______________________________________________
wp-testers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-testers
_______________________________________________
wp-testers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-testers
_______________________________________________
wp-testers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-testers
_______________________________________________
wp-testers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-testers
