Re: [SAtalk] Scores over 5

2002-03-11 Thread Craig Hughes
On 3/11/02 4:53 AM, "Michael Moncur" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Matt Sergeant wrote: >> I would suggest that we be extremely careful about checks that get given >> a score over 5. Part of the beauty of SpamAssassin (and heuristics in >> general) is that usually a hit just contributes to the ove

RE: [SAtalk] Scores over 5

2002-03-11 Thread Michael Moncur
Matt Sergeant wrote: > I would suggest that we be extremely careful about checks that get given > a score over 5. Part of the beauty of SpamAssassin (and heuristics in > general) is that usually a hit just contributes to the overall score, but > doesn't necessarily tip things over. Having said tha

[SAtalk] Scores over 5

2002-03-11 Thread Matt Sergeant
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Craig Hughes wrote: > Yes, that might be a little high I would suggest that we be extremely careful about checks that get given a score over 5. Part of the beauty of SpamAssassin (and heuristics in general) is that usually a hit just contributes to the overall score, but does