From: Tony Williams 

Why get an unfiltered account when I can pay my ISP to do the filtering for
me - they'll almost certainly do a better job of it.

Yes, I could set up custom software and filters but the ISP handles mail
for all its users so it spot a spammer who sends mail to one user and set
up a filter for everyone else before they even get hit.

The many private blacklists are where we're at now, and it is difficult for
people to get off them. Putting an IP into a blacklist is only half the
story because spammers change addresses all the time and some poor sod is
going to inherit their blacklisted address. An authoritative blacklist
could reduce the collateral damage by delisting addresses when the spammer
has moved on. Like I said, I don't think it'll happen.

--
Tony

Geo. wrote:
> "Tony Williams"  wrote in message
> news:3dfbe15f{at}w3.nls.net...
>
>
>>Depends on your perspective. As an email user I can set up a filter
>>which sends all messages starting with the string
"[SPAM]" to a separate
>>folder and either ignore them or send complaints. If you run the
>>receiving servers it's true that tagging won't cut down the load but you
>>can use it as a sort of probation instead of going straight to blocking.
>
>
> But in that case why not just get an unfiltered account and do your own
> filtering? What's the point of putting the filtering load on the server at
> all if  you aren't going to block? There are way more spare cycles at the
> client end so why not spread out the load by taking advantage of that?
>
>
>>As always: your server, your rules.
>
>
> My servers do both filtered and unfiltered mail, the choice is the users. I
> just don't see any sense in having the server read every email if all it's
> going to do is give you an opinion on that email. Better you have your
> machine give you an opinion because you can customize it to your liking
> then.
>
>
>>Filters which use Bayesian statistical techniques are surprisingly good
>>at identifying spam (no, I don't understand the math very well).
>
>
> They are only as good as the people who configure them.
>
>
>>Blacklists are the ultimate weapon though, and I wish there were some
>>sort of official blacklist rather than the multiple private ones we have
>>at the moment. Probably won't happen.
>
>
> I think I understand why, because it would be more effective if there were
> one that lots and lots of people use. But something else to consider. If
> everyone ran their own blacklist then it would be a real pita for an ISP who
> didn't deal with the spam problem because they would be on hundreds of
> blacklists and it would be very difficult to get off them all just because
> they cleaned up this month. It would make it more important to all ISPs to
> get and stay spam free because of the time it would take to get off all the
> blacklists.
>
> Geo.
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4