James G. Sack (jim) wrote:
Tracy R Reed wrote:
I get a thousand a day. 32 have come in since I sent the original mail
about the false positive. Spam filtering is a necessity and well worth
it or I would run an ever greater risk of losing an important email than
if I didn't filter. I've never had anything important land in the junk
folder. Just the occasional mailing list mail.
Just curious: What do you actually do to look for false positives?
- scan 1000 senders & subjects?
Yes. Once sent to my spam folder, which is sorted by subject, I find it
pretty easy to quickly to scan-by-eyeball the Subject column for false
positives and then the Sender column very quickly just to double check.
I find probably one per 10,000 (ten thousand) spams.
After the spam folder is initially filled in the morning with the
night's catch, it takes a couple of minutes to perform the above
routine. After that, each time I check for mail, I purge the spam
folders (after doing my eyeball check) which usually only holds a few
spams in each account.
In all, it probably takes less time than reading router logs.
- scan only those with borderline scores? (any stats?)
I don't know how to do that in MTB.
- run other filters and scan the results or exceptions?
Regards,
..jim
That method seems not worth the effort for me.
--
Best Regards,
~DJA.
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
