On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 04:02:52PM -0400, Tim wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jun 2003, Jim Ford wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 10:10:02AM -0400, Timothy J. Schutte wrote:
> >
> > > X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=2.0
> >
> > Gosh - your required hits is low. Don't you get a lot of false positive
On Wed, 11 Jun 2003, Jim Ford wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 10:10:02AM -0400, Timothy J. Schutte wrote:
>
> > X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=2.0
>
> Gosh - your required hits is low. Don't you get a lot of false positives?
> The default of 5 works fine for me.
No, but I do have a rathe
On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 10:10:02AM -0400, Timothy J. Schutte wrote:
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=2.0
Gosh - your required hits is low. Don't you get a lot of false positives?
The default of 5 works fine for me.
Regards: Jim Ford
--
Don't use this address! ---> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <---
Got this little beauty in today's batch of email:
-- Forwarded message --
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by localhost.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D9AF2B9BE
for <[
