RE: [SAtalk] RD: "justified" HTML

2003-12-16 Thread Regis Wilson
Based on the excellent feedback, the latest generation of rule looks like: full JUSTIFIED_TEXT /(\n.{74}=){4}/ describe JUSTIFIED_TEXT Body uses 74 char wide, justified text score JUSTIFIED_TEXT2.0 There are a few false positives, so your site may reduce the score as needed. Of course, wi

Re: [SAtalk] RD: "justified" HTML

2003-12-15 Thread Keith C. Ivey
Regis Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > full JUSTIFIED_HTML /(\n.{74}=){3,}/ > describe JUSTIFIED_HTML Body uses 74 char wide, justified HTML code > score JUSTIFIED_HTML2.0 > > I read some articles that urge against the {} notation. Can someone enlighten > me? In your case, you should

Re: [SAtalk] RD: "justified" HTML

2003-12-12 Thread Robert Menschel
Hello Regis, Friday, December 12, 2003, 9:35:18 AM, you wrote: RW> One type of spam I receive is a weirdly formatted HTML that is exactly 74 RW> characters wide with an "=" at the end of each line. This may be in a RW> normal speicification. You can set your own scores. For me, the score has R

RE: [SAtalk] RD: "justified" HTML

2003-12-12 Thread Matthew . van . Eerde
M > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [SAtalk] RD: "justified" HTML > > > One type of spam I receive is a weirdly formatted HTML that > is exactly 74 > characters wide with an "=" at the end of each line. This may be in a > normal speicification. You can set

[SAtalk] RD: "justified" HTML

2003-12-12 Thread Regis Wilson
One type of spam I receive is a weirdly formatted HTML that is exactly 74 characters wide with an "=" at the end of each line. This may be in a normal speicification. You can set your own scores. For me, the score has been wildly successful, 3000 spam in a week, no ham. full JUSTIFIED_HTML