On Sat, 18 May 2002 10:52:26 -0500 (CDT) David W Tamkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> J C Lawrence wrote, >> I can live with a 0.002% false positive rate quite comfortably, >> especially as its the very rare exception among those false positives >> that I actually want to read (hasn't happened yet this year). > Your ability to determine that nearly all the false positives are > messages that, while not spam, are things you wouldn't want to read > anyway indicates that you are able to review the messages that your > routines treat as spam: you have them directed to a folder designated > for them, for example. The ISP that rejects or discards false > positives along with actual spam doesn't allow its victims, er, > doesn't allow its customers that luxury. If you read the message I wrote you'll note I wasn't commenting on that, but on the general behaviour and effectiveness of SpamAssassin. Please, don't cross threads which weren't. -- J C Lawrence ---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas. [EMAIL PROTECTED] He lived as a devil, eh? http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.
