From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,103b407e8b68350b
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-01-06 08:31:59 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!nycmny1-snh1.gtei.net!cambridge1-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!bos-service1.ext.raytheon.com!dfw-service2.ext.raytheon.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Wes Groleau <wesgroleau@despammed.com>
Reply-To: wesgroleau@despammed.com
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
 rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826
X-Accept-Language: en,es-MX,es,pt,fr-CA,fr
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: [off-topic] spam-filters
References: <VtlQ9.42144$%3.10762066@twister.neo.rr.com>
 <C900921B7A3FDDD4.5FD752FF5D42F9AF.349D2214D482463F@lp.airnews.net>
 <autmq3$4oe$1@slb6.atl.mindspring.net> <3E147D79.2070703@cogeco.ca>
 <BA3A535D.177F%yaldnifw@blueyonder.co.uk>
 <ba162549.0301030124.237c7a7e@posting.google.com>
 <4519e058.0301031434.51a0c880@posting.google.com>
 <ba162549.0301040053.1e7dbedc@posting.google.com>
 <wmFR9.111225$Y86.101474@news2.central.cox.net>
 <zmHR9.253680$a8.123558@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>
 <81NR9.112823$Y86.60750@news2.central.cox.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <1ciS9.217$Z74.1099@dfw-service2.ext.raytheon.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 11:31:56 -0500
NNTP-Posting-Host: 151.168.133.155
X-Complaints-To: news@ext.ray.com
X-Trace: dfw-service2.ext.raytheon.com 1041870717 151.168.133.155 (Mon,
 06 Jan 2003 10:31:57 CST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 10:31:57 CST
Organization: Raytheon Company
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:32620
Date: 2003-01-06T11:31:56-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


> joking. My ISP caught 37 for January 3). But I almost never have to look 
> at a spam any more. I think in the last week Mozilla let about 2 slip 
> through, and hit one false positive.

Can it catch them just by headers, or does it evaluate
for spam AFTER it downloads the entire piece of crap,
complete with HTML bloat (generated by Microsoft Word
or some equally lame thing that toggles styles on and
off multiple times on every line) and all the stupid
graphic attachments?

I just route my mail through despammed.com - a free
forwarding service.  I see one or two spams per month.

There are other such services.  One is myrealbox.com.
Another is mailircuit.com (although I haven't seen it
in a year, and it might have become a pay service).

Can Mozilla spam-check the mail and then hand it off
to the mail-reader I prefer?