[KLUG Members] Tuning qmail

[Adam Williams]

> When we first started, we only blocked a few hundred spam per week. 
> Since then it's been constantly increasing (to ~9000/week now).  The
> amount of spam getting though has also increased, although the overall
> percentage of spam getting though is probably the same or less.  It's
> getting to the point now that I'm going to give spamassassin (or
> something else) a try in addition to spamcop.

I've looked at other things and they are all either slow and shaky perl
crap, too complicated, or require too much user interaction.  If the
user actually has to *DO* something, they'll just delete the messages
and ignore them (well, except for an enlightened *FEW*).  And none of
these tools really help solve the problem;  the SPAM continues to
arrive, get miltered, stored - whether or not the user takes the time to
check/flag/mark/whatever... the message.  So what does the *SYSTEM*
gain? Absa friggin' lutely nothin'.  So it is a user problem, not one
for the system to solve (IMHO).

> Since Spamcop is driven by users reporting spam, it's my opinion that
> there is no such thing as a "false positive" with spamcop.  Other people
> tend to disagree (I'm BCC'ing one such person on this email, maybe he'll
> join this list and tell us his side about why he won't use spamcop). :-)

And we encourage our users to get a SPAMCop submission address and
forward SPAM messages.  The enlightened *FEW* get their head around this
pretty easy.