watermark and spam

[Noel Butler]

On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 08:51 +0100, Julian Field wrote:

> 
> On 10/05/2010 05:13, Noel Butler wrote:
> > On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 01:25 +0200, Mikael Syska wrote:
> >>
> >> Does the average user even check that mail could be miss tagged, our 
> >> average users don't.
> >>
> >
> > We have many that do, mostly corporate clients that inquire about it, 
> > but if it happens to corporate clients enough to concern them, the 
> > affect must be global and those home users must be  bothered as well.
> > I modified our internal blurb to advise people on it long time ago, 
> > but thats not fixing the root cause, its only working around it, 
> > something im not fond of in any situation. 
> So how would you like it to work and how does that differ from what it 
> does now? And in *exactly* what circumstances do you want the change?
> 

perhaps an entry in the spam report that says the same as the hidden
header?
I don't think it needs a score, just an entry saying why it was deemed
as spam, what do you think ?


Cheers


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20100510/a4d1e4a9/attachment.html