RE: [2] [2] [cobalt-users] speaking of spam...

[Rodolfo Paiz <rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> On the other hand I think you are not doing them a favour of
> catchin all spam for them. You might like to ask them, if they
> really like that catch all thing. If they do - fine !  But maybe
> they don't and they didn't tell you ...
>
> Finally we are both on the customers side when it comes to
> service. Just the approach is a little different ;-)

Thomas,

I apologize... I should have been clearer. I have catch-all addresses
enabled, yes. I also try to stop what spam I can at the server level,
before it ever gets to people's mailboxes. However, the two rarely mix.

It is our experience (all 74 days of it...) that the catch-all catches
mostly legitimate mails with typos in it, both incoming and outgoing.
This is why our customers are happy to get the service; we save them
from looking foolish about 5% of the time when they forget to spell.

You are right in that I have not asked anyone whether they want spam
filtering or not... I must admit the very thought of someone *wanting*
to get 7,000,000 get-rich-quick offers annually never occurred to me.

However, two considerations: (1) we advertise that we try to filter spam
for our users, so they definitely know they're getting it and are free
to complain if they don't like it; and (2) I only block definite spam,
that with forged from addresses or sent directly to my port 25 from
dial-up computers. Mail with legitimate addresses gets through, even if
it's selling something.

--
Rodolfo J. Paiz
rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>