This boils down to a collection of 'good mail' and a collection of 'bad mail', that in my opinion needs to reflect the users' interests, therefore I am a bit leery in 'sharing' this data, but am not dismissing it's potential.
collection of 'bad mail'? as in sending out a list of e-mail known to be spam? as i have opined earlier i think that 'results' based cooperatives have a major drawback in that the needs of the end users are unique diverge quickly once the most obvious spam is identified. there is a point at which the lack of granularity in the decsion making process (message level) exceeds the value of multiple inputs and makes. you also end up needing a mechanism for determining who is an authority, how to dispute false positives, the messaging format for transmitting 'bad' e-mail, etc... it's not that i am suggesting that you don't pursue it, but that you might want to look through the trials and tribulations of such efforts as vipul's razor to get a feel for the pitfalls and limitations if you haven't done so already. it is a pretty easy system to break.
if you are interested we can discuss this in more detail off-list, but my experience is that cooperative work on determining what terms. phrases, patterns, etc. are used to catch specific material are generally more useful than the sharing of mail that has been identified by cooperative efforts as spam.
b
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
