|Main Archive Page > Month Archives > spamassassin-dev archives|
--- Comment #6 from Kevin A. McGrail <email@example.com> 2011-10-03 19:00:49 UTC ---
> If the RBL provides a documented "You are overusing the free service" return
> code, what is the problem with recognizing that and hitting a non-scoring
> (0.001, neither FP nor FN) rule with an informative description? It doesn't
> need to contain a link to the RBL's TOS or subscription page (advertising), but
> telling the admin _why_ they're getting an unusable response from the RBL is
> I think that's a much better approach than either removing one of the most
> effective antispam techniques by default, or having the RBL suddenly mark
> _everything_ as spam because we don't interpret the "overuse" code correctly.
I don't have a problem with this concept. My veto statement above had to do
with the actual URL and the description which were a direct link and
advertisement for a vendor.
A more generic message such as this would be fine and +1'd by me:
The RBL responded with a failure code. Visit www.spamassassin.org/rbl for more
-- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.