[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Justin Mason) writes: > Side issue: why use easy removal without questions? Spammers do not have > the bandwidth to remove themselves from every list. If they *do* go to > the bother, and a URL does get removed, then repeatedly crops up in spam > again, it should be raised as an alarm -- and possibly brought to the > notice of other people -- e.g. this list or others.
I'm not so sure easy removal is actually a good idea. I think it's better to have FP-prevention mechanisms that don't require attention of the email sender. Why? Because it's a mechanism biased towards savvy users, people who use blacklists, SpamAssassin, etc. In addition, it's exactly the same folks who are already overrepresented in our ham corpus. So, the effective FP rate will be higher than it appears in our corpus *and* non-savvy senders will be penalized. Daniel -- Daniel Quinlan anti-spam (SpamAssassin), Linux, http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/ and open source consulting
