RE: [SAtalk] More spam phrase problems

2002-02-05 Thread Craig Hughes
Thanks, just noticed a math booboo in PhraseFreqs.pm which I did which is probably causing a lot of these short-message problems. Fixed, but I'll leave the bug open at a lower priority. C On Tue, 2002-02-05 at 12:05, Michael Moncur wrote: > > > could you file a bug report against this problem

RE: [SAtalk] More spam phrase problems

2002-02-05 Thread Michael Moncur
> could you file a bug report against this problem with > bugzilla.spamassassin.org? I think spam phrases need a retrofit at > least as badly as AWL does. Sure, entered as Bug #31. -- michael moncur mgm at starlingtech.com http://www.starlingtech.com/ "There is no safety in numbers, or in

Re: [SAtalk] More spam phrase problems

2002-02-05 Thread Craig Hughes
Michael, could you file a bug report against this problem with bugzilla.spamassassin.org? I think spam phrases need a retrofit at least as badly as AWL does. Thanks, C On Tue, 2002-02-05 at 04:32, Michael Moncur wrote: > The following is a message I subscribed to from a server monitoring serv

Re: [SAtalk] More spam phrase problems

2002-02-05 Thread Matt Sergeant
On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, Michael Moncur wrote: > The following is a message I subscribed to from a server monitoring service - > it's getting marked as spam due to the spam-phrases test. Its phrase score is > over 800 and it scored 4.6 points, all because the words "this message" appear > in this shor