Re: [SAtalk] Another false positive

2002-05-02 Thread Charlie Watts
On Mon, 29 Apr 2002, Sean Harding wrote: > So is +1.9 the correct score? I could just change it manually on my install > for now. Actually, I just whitelisted apple.com, so I guess it doesn't > matter much... > > And, yeah, I'd love to go back and order even more from the Apple Store to > help th

Re: [SAtalk] Another false positive

2002-04-29 Thread Craig R Hughes
-3.0 is the correct score. I just fixed it in CVS. C Sean Harding wrote: SH> So is +1.9 the correct score? I could just change it manually on my install SH> for now. Actually, I just whitelisted apple.com, so I guess it doesn't SH> matter much... SH> SH> And, yeah, I'd love to go back and orde

Re: [SAtalk] Another false positive

2002-04-29 Thread Sean Harding
So is +1.9 the correct score? I could just change it manually on my install for now. Actually, I just whitelisted apple.com, so I guess it doesn't matter much... And, yeah, I'd love to go back and order even more from the Apple Store to help the stock, but I think today's $4k will have to be enou

Re: [SAtalk] Another false positive

2002-04-29 Thread Craig R Hughes
Well, now that I've checked in the DCC stuff, I'd like to stabilize that somewhat. Once I'm happier with it, I'll do 2.21 with the amended scores, and probably with the phrases stuff switched back on again (so we can have 2.22 just after that!) C Duncan Findlay wrote: DF> On Mon, Apr 29, 2002

Re: [SAtalk] Another false positive

2002-04-29 Thread Duncan Findlay
On Mon, Apr 29, 2002 at 07:31:58PM -0700, Craig R Hughes wrote: > Doh! Another score in the wrong section of the scores file. The GA shouldn't > have been able to modify that one. > 2.21 soon? :-) -- Duncan Findlay ___ Spamassassin-talk mailing li

RE: [SAtalk] Another false positive

2002-04-29 Thread Craig R Hughes
Doh! Another score in the wrong section of the scores file. The GA shouldn't have been able to modify that one. C Michael Moncur wrote: MM> > X-Spam-Report: 5.1 hits, 5 required; MM> > * 1.9 -- Subject looks like order info MM> > * 0.6 -- From: does not include a real name MM> > * -

RE: [SAtalk] Another false positive

2002-04-29 Thread Michael Moncur
> X-Spam-Report: 5.1 hits, 5 required; > * 1.9 -- Subject looks like order info > * 0.6 -- From: does not include a real name > * -0.5 -- BODY: Contains 'Dear Somebody' > * 1.1 -- BODY: Contains a tollfree number > * 2.0 -- Subject contains a unique ID number Wasn't ORDER_STATUS s

Re: [SAtalk] Another false positive

2002-04-29 Thread Craig R Hughes
Woo woo! Go Sean! I bought a bunch of apple stock not long ago. Why not go back to the store and order more ;) Actually, I ordered something from there about 2 weeks ago, and it got through fine; I think that was still 2.11 so I guess the new scores are hurting my portfolio :( C Sean Harding

[SAtalk] Another false positive

2002-04-29 Thread Sean Harding
Confirmation of my Apple Store order got blocked, just barely... X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=5.1 required=5.0 tests=ORDER_STATUS,NO_REAL_NAME,DEAR_SOMEBODY,CALL_FREE,SUBJ_HAS_UNIQ_ID version=2.20 X-Spam-Flag: YES X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.20 (devel $Id: SpamAssass