RE: [vps-mail] I Hate Spam! Time for an update.

["Brian Haines" <providertalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Yes, I was correcting it. Maybe if I had stuck with it I could have had
those results. It might have done 99% of all of the actual Spam I receive,
but it was catching less than half of the spam getting by SA.

Brian 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-vps-mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-vps-mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Steve Yates
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 4:09 PM
To: vps-mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [vps-mail] I Hate Spam! Time for an update.

On Mon, 9 May 2005 15:37:28 -0400
"Brian Haines" <providertalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I found that K9 only
> caught a minimal amount of the SPAM

	Really?  And you were correcting it?  If not corrected - especially
in the beginning - it will "learn" that spam is good.  :)  I'm at 99.91%
accuracy here since 11/04, about the same at home, and my co-workers all use
it as well.

 - Steve Yates
 - ITS, Inc.
 - Intel: we put the "um..." in Pentium.

~ Taglines by Taglinator 4 - www.srtware.com ~

======================================================================
This is <vps-mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>       <http://www.perlcode.org/lists/>
Before posting a question, please search the archives (see above URL).


======================================================================
This is <vps-mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>       <http://www.perlcode.org/lists/>
Before posting a question, please search the archives (see above URL).