yes, imho a pmc member should make a ticket to have apache.org resolve
it so its not saying blocked rules
Unless it's causing an FP, I would likely ignore it. I don't know that
Infra is going to have time to work on it without it causing an issue.
Regards,
KAM
--
Kevin A. McGrail
kmcgr...@
On 17/02/2025 03:23, Bill Cole wrote:
On 2025-02-16 at 04:41:25 UTC-0500 (Sun, 16 Feb 2025 19:41:25 +1000)
Noel Butler
is rumored to have said:
On 16/02/2025 01:07, Bill Cole wrote:
On 2025-02-15 at 07:42:44 UTC-0500 (Sat, 15 Feb 2025 13:42:44 +0100)
wissen.online | Stefan Mehlhorn
is rumore
On 2025-02-16 at 10:38:38 UTC-0500 (Sun, 16 Feb 2025 10:38:38 -0500)
Alex
is rumored to have said:
[quoting me]
TxRep (like AWL) is fed not by Bayes learning (sa-learn) but rather
it
tracks the combination of an address and a source IP range (/24) with
a
tally of the SA scores of messages usi
On 2025-02-16 at 04:41:25 UTC-0500 (Sun, 16 Feb 2025 19:41:25 +1000)
Noel Butler
is rumored to have said:
On 16/02/2025 01:07, Bill Cole wrote:
On 2025-02-15 at 07:42:44 UTC-0500 (Sat, 15 Feb 2025 13:42:44 +0100)
wissen.online | Stefan Mehlhorn
is rumored to have said:
Hi Bill,
so do you
>
>
>
> > Is there any benefit to training an email that's already hitting
> > bayes99?
>
> Yes. The tokens which made it hit 99% are already doing their jobs, but
> the rest of the message that Bayes isn't seeing as spammy may turn out
> to be what makes the next spam hit 99.9%
>
I have noticed t
On 16/02/2025 01:07, Bill Cole wrote:
On 2025-02-15 at 07:42:44 UTC-0500 (Sat, 15 Feb 2025 13:42:44 +0100)
wissen.online | Stefan Mehlhorn
is rumored to have said:
Hi Bill,
so do you have another idea?
Hi Stefan,
No, I do not, aside from the implicit starting point: do not send spam.
Mak
