Re: Spam Filter ?

Why dont you try spam killer. It comes with instructions. Once you have
listed your spam mail it will be excellent. One problem is that it finds
your mail before your own Email client.
Steve
"Night_Seer" <ecamacho4 at hotmail dot com> wrote in message
news:zZmdncjitLi63BaiRVn-...
> Thor wrote:
> > "Night_Seer" <ecamacho4 at hotmail dot com> wrote in message
> > news:XaidnSFN89AQqxaiRVn-...
> >> Iowa883 wrote:
> >>> I downloaded it and evidently don't have it setup right. When email
> >>> comes in, it sets in mailwasher for a little while and if I don't
> >>> catch it, it will go into my Outlook Express anyway. What is the
> >>> purpose of the Mailwasher, now I am still manually deleting all my
> >>> Spam. I had might as well not even use it, it is the same as before.
> >>> But I leave my outlook on all the time, do I have to shut it off
> >>> when I am not using it ?
> >>>
> >>> Iowa883
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "Iowa883" <> wrote in message
> >>> news:bmad3v$bal$...
> >>>> Guys,
> >>>> I get over 40 SPAM messages a day. What is the best SPAM filter on
> >>>> the market ? Will it solve my unwanted SPAM but still filter out my
> >>>> good messages ?
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Iowa883
> >> Turn off outlooks automatic mail checking, and have mailwasher
> >> always do the checking. Then you can set ti to send mail to outlook
> >> after you have placed it wither in friends list or a blacklist. Yes
> >> its almost like doing everything twice, but its the best i have
> >> seen, and mailwasher really makes it easy.
> >> --
> >> Night_Seer
> >
> > You should check out "POPfile". It's a bayesean filter that
> > integrates with OE as a proxy. It blows mailwasher out of the water
> > as far as I'm concerned. After a bit of a learning period for the
> > filter, you don't have any extra steps, except if you need to correct
> > an improperly classified message. Otherwise, just check your email as
> > normal and POPfile runs transparantly in the background. My POPfile
> > statistics page is showing my current filtering accuracy at 97.97%
> > accurate, and that is based on 497 messages checked and filtered
> > since August 3.
> I used the Bayesean filter in Mozilla, which works ok for my regualar
> mail but for some reason works shiity for hotmail (i use another proxy to
> get my hotmail into Mozilla Thunderbird). I always end up checking my
> junkmail anyways, so I decided to just stick with mailwasher. IMHO,
because
> bayesean filtering isn't 100 percent perfect, and never will be, you will
> still be checking your junk mail to make sure nothing that you wanted was
> marked as junk, so no matter what you use, your going to have to go
through
> mail twice. I think your right in that Bayesean makes it better, but I
> think in the end, the only real solution is to execute spammers in the
most
> gruesome way, and make it a public spectacle in order to keep other people
> form spamming...lol
> --
> Night_Seer
>
>

Steve Gill