Re: [exim] Why is this list so abusive?

Marc Perkel wrote:

>
> Tom Kistner wrote:
>
>>And you expect these losers to do your job - for free. Which is why I
>>(and I hope many others) will stop reacting to your postings (including
>>those who tell you to RTFM).
>>
>>
>
>
> Well - they do. And one of the reason they do I assume is that whenever
> I come up with a great trick to block spam I share it with everyone. And
> I've done a fair amount of work helping to organize the Wiki. I have one
> of the most advanced spam filter services on the planet and a lot of
> people here are interested in how I do that.
>
>

Marc, a good deal of the 'interest' has to do with your value as
perhaps the single most contrarian of posters.

You try weird things most of us can't be bothered with.

A one-man R&D department - pushing the limits in different
*dimension* than others care to work in.

But - as the saying goes 'Even a blind hog finds an acorn every
now and then', so don't give up, and don't go away....

Your 'projects', OTOH, might sit better if your goal and
proposed methodology for each was explained in the *first* post,
instead being rationed out over half a dozen such, riddle-style.

Most of us can do a better - or at least more supportable - job
of blocking spam with the stock toolset, let alone SA, so
neither should you confuse mere curiosity with adulation.

'spam filters' needn't be 'advanced' or 'sophisticated' - just
very, very thorough. The best are built on a *reduced set* of
standard acl's. No black-magic required.

Exim+Exiscan+SA+ClamAV, to name one common mix, was doing a
superb job before you walked in. Still does.

JM2CW

Bill