On 5/11/2011 9:03 AM, Tim Kehres wrote:
I guess it all depends on what you consider a 'significant problem'. The metrics
used to make this determination will vary from business to business. For the
several sites that I run here (small in comparison), any false positives
represent a potential loss of business or a hit on business and we do everything
we can to avoid. Other mechanisms used in tandem seem to knock the spam levels
down to a level, at least for us, that are acceptable without the uncertainties
associated with RBL's.
The issue is not that some folk comfortably choose not to use such lists. There
are always such cases.
The question is whether they are in widespread use (they are), whether they are
deemed essential by those users (it is) and whether they cause the cited problem
(apparently only minimally).
False positives can be extremely damaging. I've nearly lost some consulting
business because my filters were overly aggressive. But that said, the industry
very clearly deems them generally a net positive.