On Sun, 2005-12-04 at 01:38 +0100, guenther wrote: > > > Slight correction: SpamAssassins built-in /Bayes/ filters need to be > > > trained. The default SA rules work from the very first message, as do > > > the network tests. Bayes needs to learn 200 Spam and Ham /each/, before > > > kicking in (default install). > > > <snip>
> [1] Actually, "mails" are never learned. Their contents, the words are > learned and identified with the overall score of the message. So > according to the Bayes filter, some words are strong signs of being > either Ham or Spam, whereas others aren't. (Basically, just keep in mind > that words are learned, rather than entire mails.) I find that the "learning" is still producing too many negatives. I'm getting repeat spam that is similar to "learned" messages. I found my SpamAssassin settings in webmin & the "Hits above which a message is considered spam" setting is at 5. I don't know what a good SA setting is for this. I'd like to make it more discriminating in reasonable steps, but need some practical pointers for a good way to fine tune it. Is there a generally accepted start setting for this? Are the other settings more applicable to it? I have: Hits above which a message is considered spam 5 Whitelist score factor .5 Number of times to check From: address MX 2 Seconds to wait between MX checks 2 Skip RBL open-relay check? No Seconds to wait for RBL queries 30 Number of Received: headers to check with RBL 2 _______________________________________________ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
