Daniel Quinlan wrote:
DQ> If a positively-scored rule matches a spam, it's goodness goes up by
DQ> its score, but if it matches a non-spam, it's goodness goes down by
DQ> its score. The inverse is true for negatively-scored rules. You can
DQ> weight false-positives if you want (I didn't in the
Andrew Kohlsmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On May 17, 2002 06:22 pm, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> > FROM_AND_TO_SAME - I mail myself notes
>
> Agreed, or sometimes I sent to myself when I have a BCC mailing
Maybe FROM_AND_TO_SAME should not match if my_address is set (well,
once it gets adde
On May 17, 2002 06:22 pm, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> FROM_AND_TO_SAME - I mail myself notes
Agreed, or sometimes I sent to myself when I have a BCC mailing
> VERY_SUSP_RECIPS and VERY_SUSP_CC_RECIPS - people use large
> internal To and Cc all the time
This isn't just for internal stu
Last night, I wrote a small perl script to gauge the "goodness" of
each rule and its score. The intent is to identify rules that need to
be re-examined.
If a positively-scored rule matches a spam, it's goodness goes up by
its score, but if it matches a non-spam, it's goodness goes down by
its sc
