My suggestion is to move your filter threshold to 4.5 and stop worrying
about it.
SCott
At 02:31 PM 1/30/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe the idea is right but your example is wrong. 4.92 rounds to 4.9,
not to 5.0
It may have been any number between 4.95 and 4...., say 4.983
> I
At 09:24 AM 1/20/2004, Chris Santerre wrote:
> -Original Message-----
> From: Scott Williams , Area4 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 9:50 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] Schools Slapped? FVGT
>
>
> I just started using
I just started using the FVGT rules and got this FP.
Do I understand this right, the rule below penalizes (scores high) anyone
with a .us domain?
Many schools across the country use the .k12.ss.us format where ss is
their state two letter identifier.
thanks
SCott
2.4 FVGT_u_BZ_TLD
Our new law as of 1/1/04, now if it was just enforceable !!
http://www.spamlaws.com/state/il.html
SCott
At 10:13 AM 1/8/2004, Genchev, Sergei wrote:
>I have some mail that was received by this particular user. I have put
>the tarbal here: http://ns2.wananchi.com/~wash/SPAM/ and it is in
>Maildi
Below is a SPAM that came through with a score of 0.7.
the only thing that hit was the DATE IN PAST
What are the Best Practices with SA to be able to stop these in the future?
Thanks
SCott
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 18:08:21 -0500
From: "Sandra Dee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subje
If you see two spammers hang hopefully a 100 will stop or atleast move
off shore.
SCott
At 01:40 PM 12/12/2003, Larry Rosenman wrote:
--On Friday, December 12, 2003 14:33:34 -0500 Greg Cirino - Cirelle
Enterprises <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No noticeable decrease in spam here...
did the
