Talk:DSPAM

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Untitled discussion

dspam is like spamassasin but it's easier to configure and so it's more scalable so it's worth including it in wikipedia 00 tux(my point of views(for npov), howto customise a signature) | talk 21:18, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Please read the notability guideline for how to establish notability on Wikipedia. -- intgr 21:21, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

i didn't understand what was notability...sorry(i read too much quickelu and thought it wasn't worth inclding because it wasn't part of the following categories:Biographies, Books, Companies, Fiction, Music, Neologisms, Numbers, Web content.) 00 tux(my point of views(for npov), howto customise a signature) | talk 21:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

dspam is totally notably notable. It's one of the premiere spam filters and is known for being several orders of magnitude more accurate than spamassasin while using significantly fewer resources. I've got a 99.935% spam identification rate with it over the past two years, so with about 800 spam per day, I'm getting at most 2 or 3 a month. I'm distrustful of the TREC 2005 paper, as it is contrary to my experience in the field with regards to spamassasin and dspam. The best I've ever gotten with spamassasin is about 95% accuracy. But the initial comment is incorrect--dspam is quite a bit more difficult to configure than spamassasin. But it is so worth the effort. --petrockette | talk 07:09, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Issues with this article

I've removed the three tags from this article. If anyone thinks this article still has problems (that they can't fix), please re-add the tags and also describe the problem here so that the next person will know what to fix in order to remove the reason for the tags being there. Gronky 11:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC)