| 1 |
On Sunday 15 January 2006 04:08, Stroller wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I'd be very happy with a 95% success rate on spam detection, but |
| 4 |
> obviously false positives are a Bad Thing. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Never tried it myself, but I've read many articles that say that dspam is |
| 7 |
a better filter than spamassassin, and can be trained by users simply by |
| 8 |
instructing them to forward false negatives to some special email |
| 9 |
address of your choice; after this initial setup, it requires very |
| 10 |
little maintenance, both for the end users and for the admin. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Read something here: |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
http://www.nuclearelephant.com/projects/dspam/ |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
-- |
| 17 |
Much of the excitement we get out of our work is that we don't |
| 18 |
really know what we are doing. |
| 19 |
- Edsger W. Dijkstra |
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives