In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >On Sun, Jun 15, 2003 at 11:45:17AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: >If some number of Debian developers utilizing blocking that has a >false positive rate of as high as 2 per day by some estimates, do we >as a body consider it acceptable if some percentage of Debian >developers:
Alternativly, if Debian dosn't implement spam blocking, do we consider it acceptable that: Some developers stop reading any email, since the vast majority of it is spam. Developers delete messages unread because of spammy sounding subjects. Developers spend so much time reading spam they don't have time to fix bugs and do other useful work. People advocating not filtering spam based on some false positives seem to forget that being burried under the load of spam can cause more false postitives by the human forced to do the filtering. On my personal mailbox, I use some rather aggrasive lists that I wouldn't recomend to Debian at this time. (relays.osirusoft.com, which includes SPEWS and SBL, and block.blars.org that I run myself and don't recomend to others.) It still gets ten times as much spam as non-spam. Without the spam filters, I'd probably wind up not reading email at all. -- Blars Blarson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.blars.org/blars.html "Text is a way we cheat time." -- Patrick Nielsen Hayden