On Tuesday 26 November 2002 10:22 pm, Scott Long wrote: > On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 21:30:51 +0100 > > Luca Olivetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >En/na David Dawes ha escrit: > >>All I can really say so far without having analysed the data is that > >>the number of false positives has been relatively small compared to > > > >Zero false positives is the only acceptable result, if you're using > >it to discard email. > >You won't get that with any of blacklists. > > As an author of one of the anti-spam abstracts Mr. Packard mentioned I > can't help but comment here. > > IMHO blacklist systems are unethical because they work by holding ISP > customers as hostages. The idea being, if you tick off enough people, > they'll complain and get the ISP to fix their relays. The collateral > damage due to this approach far outweighs any benefit gained by > blocking spam. > > I'll pretend this list is a democracy, and cast my imaginary vote for > deactivating the RBL checks in SpamAssassin. > > BTW, the archives of this list make up a sizeable portion of the email > corpus we use to train and test our systems. Thanks, everybody ;-)
well, if it works - then good! Hopefully it will piss off the customers enough that they'll go to another isp, or the isp will sort it out. If a customer cares enough about his email, he'll use a more ethical isp. JohnFlux _______________________________________________ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
