Re: [Evolution] Built-in spam filtering? (Spam grading is better)

[Jim Frost <jimf frostbytes com>]

On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 18:48, Arthur Britto wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 09:12, Jim Frost wrote:
> > I note that I looked into spamassassin, which seems to be the preferred
> > technique using an external filter, and I really dislike its rule-based
> > system.  Way too many false positives, and a lot of work to set up and
> > maintain too.  Spam filtering would be a great integrated feature and
> > doesn't look like it'd be a lot of work to implement.
>
> SpamAssassin + fetchmail + procmail + Evolution is great.

This may be the case, although I reiterate that I don't like
spamassassin because it doesn't do as good a job as statistical filters
and takes a lot more work to tune.  Still, setting up something like
this is not straightforward and has no advantages over having an
integrated filter.

I mean, I have to learn how to set up and maintain not one software
package but four.  It's nice that you all have the time to screw around
with all that stuff, but I have an actual job I have to do.

jim