Re: Bit OT but it's about SPAM

On 10/17/07, Randal, Phil <prandal@herefordshire.gov.uk> wrote:
> Hyperbole?
>
> Well, let's take a look at the figures on my mail relay boxes

Not to single out Phil, but so far everyone is quoting (among other things) the percentage of mail that they reject out of hand. You're all 100% confident that none of those were false positives?

My point was that "rejected/filtered by anti-spam techniques" and "is spam" are not synonymous, but nearly everyone who publishes spam figures behaves as if they were, and most of them have a vested interest in making the number sound as big and scary as possible. Received on Thu Oct 18 10:14:34 2007