discuss: Subscription Validation
Subject:
Re: Subscription Validation
From:
John Fleck ####@####.####
Date:
7 Sep 2002 22:37:26 -0000
Message-Id: <1031438242.1093.13.camel@jelloiii>
On Sat, 2002-09-07 at 15:30, Martin WHEELER wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Sep 2002, Sergiusz Pawlowicz wrote:
>
> > Do not use SpamAssassin any more.
>
> Ahem.
>
> So the immediate and automatic assumption is that SpamAssassin is at
> fault, is it?
> And that under no circumstances might the tldp be at fault, so don't
> even bother following up that line of thought?
>
Fault is a funny concept here. Neither are "at fault".
SpamAssassin is an imperfect attempt to solve the spam problem. Its
ruleset sometimes triggers on legitimate mail. That's inevitable when
you use its approach to spam handling.
The notion of asking legitimate mail to somehow conform to
SpamAssassin's idea of what is and is not permissable strikes me as
silly. But neither is this a bug in SpamAssassin. It's inevitable that
if you use an approach like SpamAssassin's, non-spam will sometimes be
caught up in its clutches.
The solution is to pay attention to the legitimate mail SpamAssassin is
catching and tweak your own setup to let that mail through.
Cheers,
John
--
John Fleck
####@####.#### (h) ####@####.#### (w)
http://www.inkstain.net http://www.abqjournal.com
"Sometimes, a diner is all about the mac and cheese."
- Zippy the Pinhead
