[lug] Stopping the New Generation of Spam
crichey at gmail.com
Tue Dec 5 20:54:18 MST 2006
On 12/3/06, Daniel Webb <lists at danielwebb.us> wrote:
> Have they ever mentioned their false-positive rate for the ones classified as
> spam? I imagine they're fairly good, but that would bother me. Back when I
> was using a spam tagger, I got complacent because it was so good (this the
> early days before spammers got wise to them) and started just deleting them
> without looking at them. Of course, I found out later that one of the ones I
> deleted was important and I missed out. If you have to look at the messages
> individually anyway then what's the point?
> Should people send important messages by email? No. Do they sometimes? Yes.
I don't know about statistics, but I have seen extremely few false
positives. Once about 3 months ago, google took exception to a few
mailing list items for BLUG, but once I marked them as not spam, the
problem went away. Since then I only check occasionally, and I haven't
seen any more false positives.
You pays you money (zippo), and you takes you chances.
If you fill your heart with regrets of yesterday and the worries
of tomorrow, you have no today to be thankful for.
More information about the LUG