Mailing List Archive

Just a point... can the SA licence not be modified to prevent the use of SA for evaluating way of defeating SA?!? I am guessing this breaks the spirit of the whole open source movement.

This guy obviously does not take into account that most SA admin's add there own custom rules and scores and that most of us I assume use bayes (with our own bayes db's) which this guy can't replicate.

Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Schneider [mailto:Dave.Schneider@Geac.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 7:46 AM
To: spamassassin-users@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Spammers Point of view


Interesting reading at best.
http://www.e-filtrate.com/salesletter2.html

Dave Schneider Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 7:46 AM

> Interesting reading at best.
> http://www.e-filtrate.com/salesletter2.html

I hate spam. But I love marketing to my clients with email. Many of my clients do the same and some of them express concern that their messages could get filtered. I think this COULD BE used for legitimate purposes. Don't you think Amazon or BUY.COM, both of which send out a mountain legitimate correspondence look at probabilities of their messages being filtered? And also ensure they're not erroneously blacklisted?

cheers,
Colin

Colin A. Bartlett
Kinetic Web Solutions
www.kineticweb.biz

"Dan Tappin" <dan.tappin@orourke-eng.com> wrote:

> Just a point... can the SA licence not be modified to prevent the
> use of SA for evaluating way of defeating SA?!?

Do you really expect spammers who ignore other people's rights and
wishes on a daily basis to care about a software license?

--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Yours sincerely
Dipl. Inform. Ralph Seichter

HORUS-IT
Ahornweg 10
D-57635 Oberirsen
Tel +49 2686 987880
Fax +49 2686 987889
http://horus-it.de/

Hmmm.........
""How often is it updated?"
We update the Spam Checker every time that SpamAssassin issues and update.
We currently use version 2.60. The Blacklist Checker interfaces with each
individual databases, therefore, we always get-up-to-the minute listings. "

Well another good point about the SARE :) We update constantly.

Boy look at all those Audio Generator links! The same owner as
playaudiomessage.com. I'll say no more on that.

If this is the direct competition to SA and SARE, then I'm not worried at
all.

--Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Schneider [mailto:Dave.Schneider@Geac.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 9:46 AM
To: spamassassin-users@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Spammers Point of view


Interesting reading at best.
http://www.e-filtrate.com/salesletter2.html
<http://www.e-filtrate.com/salesletter2.html>

Colin A. Bartlett <spamassassin@colinabartlett.com> wrote:
> I hate spam. But I love marketing to my clients with email. Many of
> my clients do the same and some of them express concern that their
> messages could get filtered. I think this COULD BE used for
> legitimate purposes. Don't you think Amazon or BUY.COM, both of which
> send out a mountain legitimate correspondence look at probabilities
> of their messages being filtered? And also ensure they're not
> erroneously blacklisted?

Most legitimate companies will tell their customers that they need
mofify their whitelist to allow for these non-spam, but spammy looking,
messages. I know I would much rather whitelist the 3-4 companies I deal
with online rather than muck with the rules which otherwise work very
well.


--

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Chris Barnes AOL IM: CNBarnes
chris-barnes@tamu.edu Yahoo IM: chrisnbarnes
Computer Systems Manager ph: 979-845-7801
Department of Physics fax: 979-845-2590
Texas A&M University

Ralph Seichter wrote:
> "Dan Tappin" <dan.tappin@orourke-eng.com> wrote:
>
> > Just a point... can the SA licence not be modified to prevent the
> > use of SA for evaluating way of defeating SA?!?
>
> Do you really expect spammers who ignore other people's rights and
> wishes on a daily basis to care about a software license?

Also, restrictions like that would change spamassassin from being free
software, free as in free speech, to being non-free, as in restricted
or encumbered in some way. That would be a bad thing.

Please read this reference with specific attention to number six.

http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php

Bob