Cyndi Norwitz writes: > But this isn't useful to me. Oh, I'm sure some of the really bad spam > would go away, but this is a health list and so there are *a lot* of false > positives because we mention a lot of spam-like keywords. So I'd have to > set the spam level pretty high.
Heh. You're asking a lot of the current technology; if I were you, I'd take up a collection and hire a consultant. That said ... Are you sure you get a lot of false positives? Spam filtering is more than just looking for "Viagra" or "Tylenol". You really ought to look at a sample of say 100 posts or maybe 1000, and see just how bad it gets. You might be pleasantly surprised at how few posts fall into the only-a-human-can-tell range. It's also possible to tune SpamAssassin by deemphasizing rules that give false positives, as well as by using the sa-learn tool to train its adaptive filters. (If that's not your cup of tea, take up a collection and hire a consultant.) There are alternatives such as SpamBayes which may be easier to integrate. > members will be off moderation. Their posts will go through in what > amounts to a whitelist. The rest will be moderated. I assume your list archives are non-public? Otherwise whitelisting is dangerous (I've gotten spam claiming to be from Barry Warsaw, for example). > The spam sent to the posting address will be in my moderation window. > Mixed with the legit posts. That is the problem. Saying "this is spam so > I'm sending it to you for moderation" is not helpful. The stuff is already > in moderation. Yes, we understand that. What I'm saying that saying "this is definitely spam so it goes in the trash" *is* helpful, and I get a heck of a lot of spam that doesn't anything to do with health: stock scams, counterfeit watches, and pirated software, for example. If you can get rid of all of that, wouldn't it be a big win? > Here's what I want: > > Subscribers who are unmoderated to be whitelisted. > Non-subscribers who I have set to auto-accept to be whitelisted. > Potential spam from the moderated box to be sent to my graymail Reasonable. > So, yes, I do want the spam filter to run through Mailman. Well, maybe you do. Then again, maybe life would be better if you handled all whitelisting and spam moderation through SpamAssassin. SpamAssassin *can* do all of the above without being integrated into Mailman. ------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp