On 12/05/07, Cormac Lawler cormaggio@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/12/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
I suppose you could craft a message that was arguably on-topic and also very likely to be eaten by the spam filter, in which case it would deserve to be eaten. And if you tended to do that sort of thing inadvertently, you'd probably be used to having your mail eaten ;-p
Right. :-) But I did mean my mail in all (or mostly) seriousness that there could be a legitimate mail that would trigger the spam filter. I was wondering where the line was - though I suppose an answer to my mail might lend itself towards trollspam. ;-)
With Bayesian filtering on the message body, the sort of mail from humans that I've seen get eaten by Thunderbird is messages from IT recruiters, who seem to write spam natively. GMail eats stuff from Wine-Users, presumably because it talks about the same Windows software that shows up advertised in spam.
The stuff eaten by the new spam rule is usually losing big on rules such as "sent from RBL-listed server", "sent directly from dialup" or "blatantly lies when telling me who it is" as well as Bayesian filtering on the message body.
- d.