From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Glenn Maynard Subject: Re: Re: You've been selected (aka SPAM) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 23:44:49 -0400 Sender: alsa-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <20041028034449.GF1904@zewt.org> References: <20041027225911.68651.qmail@web60802.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041027225911.68651.qmail@web60802.mail.yahoo.com> Errors-To: alsa-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: To: alsa-devel@lists.sourceforge.net List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 03:59:11PM -0700, Tom Watson wrote: > Unfortunately the digester (or whatever assembles the group of messages into a > digest) DOES NOT forward SpamAssassin Headers. It treats ALL messages as > equal. This means that the digest traffic has more visable SPAM in it. I The fact that digests are inflexible doesn't make suggestions like "disallow thread crossposting" and "ban an entire IP block wholesale" good ones. > suspect that what everyone would like (as suggested before) is to get > sourceforge to do the filtering. If it were done there, us users (regular and > digest ones) wouldn't need to do it. Why do the filtering for every subscriber > when it can be done once at the source. Isn't that logical? Spam filtering isn't perfect; it's up to each individual to decide for himself whether he trusts it not to lose mails (false positives), and putting the spam scanning results in a header allows this, instead of forcing it on everyone. -- Glenn Maynard ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5588&alloc_id=12065&op=click