If you felt so inclined, you could get some appropriate ascii art, (perhaps of a middle finger?) and send that through to him. Wouldn't count on your having a job much longer tho.
I feel your pain regarding users like that. Some people assume that spam there is an on/off switch for spam, and they are inevitably the most difficult customers anyway. When we've had to deal with this, I tend to write to write a short email demonstrating the effectiveness of the tool (produce some statistics on spam stopped) and point out that there is no way to achieve a 100% efficiency. Offer to improve to lower the boundary score to a lower value (this can be done by adding a rule that triggers on his address and adds a score to all his messages) but point out to him that this will lead to an increased chance of losing legitimate mail. If you have the stats available, you can show him the distribution of scores his messages receive, and give him some idea of roughly how many messages he will lose by moving the boundary. I find the graph useful to point out that there is a crossover point where some messages scoring say 5.2 are ham, and some that score 5.2 are spam. Either he accepts that he gets the spam or he accepts that he loses the ham. I hope that helps, R > -----Original Message----- > From: Ronan McGlue [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 14 April 2005 11:36 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB > > why is the weighting for RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB scores 0 0 0 then 0.007... > > I know there is probably a good reason for this low a score > but could someone explain it to me please as I have one very > irate user who likes nothing better than to pick holes in > spamassassin, which in turn is a headache for me. apparently > 1 spam every week is still not good enought protection for him. > > thanks > > ronan > --------------------------------------------------- This email from dns has been validated by dnsMSS Managed Email Security and is free from all known viruses. For further information contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
