On Thu, 16 Sep 2004 19:40:38 -0500, Brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Actually, I've taken just the opposite tack: I'm now relying on SA > for most of my spam filtering, and using TMDA as the "backup" to pick > up any false positives that might slip through SA...I use the > whitelisting/blacklisting fetures of TMDA heavily (much more > user-friendly than the SA implementation), but no longer rely > on the C/R features of TMDA for filtering mail. Too many valid > e-mails were sitting unconfirmed in the queue, which leads me to > believe the concept of C/R is still very foreign to (or maybe very > resented by) many. > > I've found this approach negates the need for generating keyword > addresses for every conceivable sender. > > Anecdotal? Sure...but it's no less valid than saying that C/R is > acceptable by the majority of e-mail senders. That's anecdotal as > well, AFAICS. >
It seems to me that there's an additional detail one should consider, namely how to start using a C/R-based system. If the assumption is that existing users of your email address should be able to continue to use the same address - a completely reasonable assumption - then indeed burdening these users with C/R would often be unreasonable. I can see that it would lead to users who would not understand why they can't send you email all the sudden when they could before. (Indeed, then you'd need some kind of whitelisting/priming of your whitelist.) This might also contribute to the hesitancy in the business domain to adopt C/R ideas - sales people, in particular, would probably not want to lose a potential customer to a C/R system. My thinking was more along the lines of changing your email address when you start using the system. (I find this not unreasonable: I have changed my email address professionally at least 4 times over the last 12 years or so, and my private, home-ISP-provided address has changed numerous times, due to ISPs getting into bankruptcies, acquiring and losing broadband, switching between DSL and cable, moving across the country, etc. etc.) Everytime, I had to tell the people I communicate with about my new email address. Adopting a per-sender address could simply look like another change of email address to them. BTW, I do agree that current content-based anti-spam systems are very effective (I just use gmail's and it has few false negatives and hardly any false positives.) But token-based email could provide the additional benefit of helping you prioritize the email you read, aside from simply blocking spam. - Godmar _____________________________________________ tmda-users mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users
