Re: {?} Re: {?} Re: AWL gone crazy

2009-03-27 Thread LuKreme
On 26-Mar-2009, at 20:06, Matt Kettler wrote: The name "AWL" is misleading and as a member of the SpamAssassin Project Management Committee, I can say we've talked about changing it many times, mostly because it misleads people such as yourself. Averaging Weight List Do it! Come on, you kno

Re: {?} Re: AWL gone crazy

2009-03-26 Thread Matt Kettler
Benny Pedersen wrote: > On Thu, March 26, 2009 13:22, The Doctor wrote: > >> All right then this is really odd!!! >> The person has always sent me mail from the intranet no problem. >> I just updated the perl to 5.10.0 threading >> and then I am like how did AWL change? >> > > spammers begi

Re: {?} Re: {?} Re: AWL gone crazy

2009-03-26 Thread Matt Kettler
The Doctor wrote: > > Key on the word intranet. This sender is from inside the LAN. > > This sender should be score -1000 on the AWL and not +30. > This is 100% wrong. You're fundamentally thinking of the AWL as a whitelist. Obviously, you've failed to read the wiki. The AWL is not a whitelist

RE: {?} Re: AWL gone crazy

2009-03-26 Thread Bowie Bailey
Benny Pedersen wrote: > On Thu, March 26, 2009 13:22, The Doctor wrote: > > All right then this is really odd!!! > > The person has always sent me mail from the intranet no problem. > > I just updated the perl to 5.10.0 threading > > and then I am like how did AWL change? > > spammers begin to use

Re: {?} Re: AWL gone crazy

2009-03-26 Thread Benny Pedersen
On Thu, March 26, 2009 13:22, The Doctor wrote: > All right then this is really odd!!! > The person has always sent me mail from the intranet no problem. > I just updated the perl to 5.10.0 threading > and then I am like how did AWL change? spammers begin to use your friends email addr as sender,

Re: AWL gone crazy

2009-03-26 Thread Benny Pedersen
On Thu, March 26, 2009 01:22, The Doctor wrote: > All right why is AWL going to score 30+ when it was told to go to > -1000 as in > score AWL -1000 AWL cant be static assigned with score -- http://localhost/ 100% uptime and 100% mirrored :)

Re: {?} Re: {?} Re: AWL gone crazy

2009-03-26 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
On 26.03.09 06:55, The Doctor wrote: > Key on the word intranet. This sender is from inside the LAN. > > This sender should be score -1000 on the AWL and not +30. The most important question from Mark was: >> Well, was the message really low scoring, despite the +30 AWL score? you didn't answe

Re: AWL gone crazy

2009-03-26 Thread Karsten Bräckelmann
On Thu, 2009-03-26 at 06:55 -0600, The Doctor wrote: > On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 08:45:46AM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote: > > > > http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/AutoWhitelist > > http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/AwlWrongWay > Key on the word intranet. This sender is from inside the LAN. > >

RE: AWL gone crazy

2009-03-26 Thread Bowie Bailey
The Doctor wrote: > > Key on the word intranet. This sender is from inside the LAN. This is irrelevant. AWL doesn't care where the mail is coming from. It only knows that sen...@example.com from XX.XX.XX.XX ip address has an average spam score of XX. If the next message from that same sender/

Re: {?} Re: {?} Re: AWL gone crazy

2009-03-26 Thread The Doctor
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 08:45:46AM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote: > The Doctor wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:11:25PM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote: > > > >> The Doctor wrote: > >> > >>> All right why is AWL going to score 30+ when it was told to go to -1000 > >>> > >>> as in > >>> > >>> sc

Re: {?} Re: AWL gone crazy

2009-03-26 Thread Matt Kettler
The Doctor wrote: > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:11:25PM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote: > >> The Doctor wrote: >> >>> All right why is AWL going to score 30+ when it was told to go to -1000 >>> >>> as in >>> >>> score AWL -1000 >>> >> You can't assign static scores to the AWL, this goes a

Re: {?} Re: AWL gone crazy

2009-03-26 Thread The Doctor
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:11:25PM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote: > The Doctor wrote: > > All right why is AWL going to score 30+ when it was told to go to -1000 > > > > as in > > > > score AWL -1000 > > You can't assign static scores to the AWL, this goes against the > definition of what it is. It's

Re: AWL gone crazy

2009-03-25 Thread Matt Kettler
The Doctor wrote: > All right why is AWL going to score 30+ when it was told to go to -1000 > > as in > > score AWL -1000 You can't assign static scores to the AWL, this goes against the definition of what it is. It's score is, by design, dynamic on a per-message basis. Otherwise it would essenti

Re: AWL gone crazy

2009-03-25 Thread RW
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 18:22:46 -0600 The Doctor wrote: > All right why is AWL going to score 30+ when it was told to go to > -1000 > > as in > > score AWL -1000 the AWL score is calculated, see the wiki page

AWL gone crazy

2009-03-25 Thread The Doctor
All right why is AWL going to score 30+ when it was told to go to -1000 as in score AWL -1000 ?? -- Member - Liberal International This is doc...@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doc...@nl2k.ab.ca God, Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising! Never Satan President Republic! Point to http://tv.cityonahill