I couldn't imagine not filtering my mail. I hate seeing spam too much. To a point where minimizing it is an obsession. I spent a considerable amount of time on

I couldn't imagine not filtering my mail. I hate seeing spam too much. To a point where minimizing it is an obsession. I spent a considerable amount of time on this about 10 years ago, but very little since [1]. Anyway, just did a quick search through mail.log and in the past 24 hours, I got 4017 SPAMS that were rejected at SMTP time by Postfix [2], about 40 SPAMs got through those, but caught by SpamAssasin [3]. 0 spam delivered to inbox. 0 false positives. 126 legitimate mails. I'd looked into greylisting some years ago, but never implemented because I didn't like the idea of delivery delays. So I'm in complete agreement with you regarding how effective SMTP level checks + rbl are, but I disagree regarding statistical filtering -- Bayes was key for me to getting 100%. I had put off adding this layer for years, because I didn't fully understand or trust it, but now I'm a believer. Also, once trained, it just works. I rarely look at my spam folder. Retraining is easy, I just drag a rare false positive/negative to HamCaught/SpamMissed folders then nightly training script auto learns. [1] I was an email admin at a local gov agency, then tried to get into email hosting biz, so it wasn't just personal obsession. [2] Using things like standard helo/client/sender/recipient restrictions, with very few custom rules, and rbl check using spamhaus. [3] SA + razor/pyzor/bayes, again with very few custom rules.