Rich Kulawiec wrote:
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 11:18:47AM -0500, Chris Lewis wrote:
We have a TIS button. I have no reason to believe that the error rate
on hitting it is even as bad as 5%.
Interesting. As I mentioned elsewhere, I recently went through nearly
5 years of feedback loop reports from AOL and found that the error
rate was 100.00% -- every report ever filed was wrong. (I think I
also mentioned that I found cases where users reported *their own
messages* to mailing lists as spam.)
I don't understand this. I tried to explain this phenomena before.
Didn't you take statistics somewhere?
Your sample is _extremely_ biased.
Let's say for sake of argument, AOL's users have a 5% error rate. 5% of
what they report via TIS isn't spam. That means, on average, 95 out of
100 reports are accurate and it is spam.
You have a FBL. But you don't send any spam, right? You only get your
share of the error rate, and none of the accurate ones - because you
don't send any spam.
So, from your perspective, the TIS button is 100% wrong. For _you_ it
is. But it's NOT reflective of TIS hits against a network that sends spam.
I have no reason to think AOL's users are any better or worse at this
than Comcast's or Yahoo's or any other ISP/mail provider.
Are you contending that Comcast's or Yahoo's FBLs are yielding correct
TIS hits? Or do you have FBLs with them at all?
What I'm arguing (and I've argued this elsewhere) is that it's not
the role of end users to set anti-spam policy (in whole or in part)
any more than it's their role to set firewall policy. It's not their
job, and they're terrible at it.
I don't think many would argue against that. Least of all me or AOL.
Neither Nortel nor AOL lets the users set anti-spam policy. What the
TIS button does is help highlight situations where the anti-spam filters
Asrg mailing list