On Mon, May 26, 2003 at 01:36:09PM -0500, Eric A. Hall wrote: > > There is also existent proof that filtering is only "mostly" successful at > even its limited role. There are plenty of problems with false positives, > delayed positives, and so forth, which cumulative conspire to make this > approach less than functional as anything but a stop-gap measure. In that > regard, filtering is analogous to defining ~delayed defeat as victory. I find filtering quite productive. I use a free Unix gateway system developed here called MailScanner (www.mailscanner.info) which brings together many different anti-spam methods and does anti-virus. Since Sugust 2002 it's filtered out 8,700 spams for me, and 570 virii, with only two false positives. Sure, it misses a few, but 8,700 deletions would have taken me a while... Tim