Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 16:58:27 -0300 (ADT)
From: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
cc: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@commandprompt.com>, pgsql-www@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Spam filtering on the mailing lists
In-Reply-To: <20080717181556.GM3934@alvh.no-ip.org>
Message-ID: <20080717165718.U69138@fserv.hub.org>
References: <200807161509.m6GF9RO14179@momjian.us>
	<1216227673.28961.139.camel@jd-laptop>
	<20080716180738.GF5758@commandprompt.com>
	<8C1E1C3655705FB9706E2E10@ganymede.hub.org>
	<20080717124653.GB6732@commandprompt.com>
	<20080717124111.P69138@fserv.hub.org>
	<20080717155428.GE3934@alvh.no-ip.org>
	<20080717150757.M69138@fserv.hub.org>
	<20080717181556.GM3934@alvh.no-ip.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed


On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
>>> Hmm, I think keeping it at 5 is a good idea, seeing how 2 of those were
>>> being substracted by the AWL and you've just cleared that.
>>>
>>> Maybe what we need is a way to remove a particular domain from the AWL
>>> instead?
>>
>> Actually, I was thinking of disabling the AWL feature altogether ... it
>> might make a few extra false-positives to need to release, but I doubt it
>> will make a huge difference ...
>
> I think that's a bad idea because it'll delay all email.

Wait, i think we are talking about two different things here ... I'm not 
talking about Greylisting AWL, I'm talking abotu the AWL that modifies the 
spamscore ... totally different databases ... I'm not touching 
GreyListing, only spamscore ...