Re: [ASRG] 0 - General, Reliability of Transport

["Chris Lewis" <clewis at nortelnetworks.com>]

Chris wrote:

> In my message where is the "no cost"?
> I stated and I quote
> "Spam should be countered but not at the expense of losing possibly
> important messages"

> Does this say let all SPAM through?

> It just says all reasonable (obvious) measures should be taken but not to
> the extreme of losing important messages.

> In other words, err on the side of caution.

Any spam filter worth using is going to have a non-zero false positive 
rate. There's no escaping that simple fact.

If "not at the expense of losing possibly important messages" means that 
you cannot have false positives on "important messages", then the only 
thing you can do is turn off your spam filters.

"doubt" detectors are just as failure prone as filters ;-)

There's _always_ an element of doubt.

You need to accept that, and decide where your comfort zone is.


_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg