Title: RE: AWL confusion.. (drinking game)
I thought these two had made it into the Wiki :)
Its SATALK comedy gold!
>-Original Message-
>From: guenther [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 2:52 PM
>To: Craig Jackson
>Cc: users@spamassassin.apac
Matt Kettler wrote:
Anders Norrbring wrote:
*sigh*.. do we really need to start a SpamAssassin-Users mailing list
drinking game?
For those not familiar, when you get home for the evening, sit down,
with a beverage of your choice (milk, soda, coffee, wine, beer) and read
the days mail for spamas
Matt Kettler skrev:
Anders Norrbring wrote:
*sigh*.. do we really need to start a SpamAssassin-Users mailing list
drinking game?
For those not familiar, when you get home for the evening, sit down,
with a beverage of your choice (milk, soda, coffee, wine, beer) and read
the days mail for spamas
Anders Norrbring wrote:
>
>> *sigh*.. do we really need to start a SpamAssassin-Users mailing list
>> drinking game?
>>
>> For those not familiar, when you get home for the evening, sit down,
>> with a beverage of your choice (milk, soda, coffee, wine, beer) and read
>> the days mail for spamassass
*sigh*.. do we really need to start a SpamAssassin-Users mailing list
drinking game?
For those not familiar, when you get home for the evening, sit down,
with a beverage of your choice (milk, soda, coffee, wine, beer) and read
the days mail for spamassassin-users.
3 drinks - Poster believes th
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 08:51:14PM +0200, Anders Norrbring wrote:
>
>> Shouldn't mail in the AWL get a *negative* score? Or did I just mess my
>> mind up?
>>
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/AwlWrongWay
>
>
*sigh*.. do we really need to start a SpamAssass
Anders Norrbring wrote:
I just got rediciously confused..
I sent a mail to myself, testing some stuff, and of course it's in the
same domain and network as the server.
I got:
9.6 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
Shouldn't mail in the AWL get a *negative* score? Or did I just
Anders Norrbring wrote:
I just got rediciously confused..
I sent a mail to myself, testing some stuff, and of course it's in the
same domain and network as the server.
I got:
9.6 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
Shouldn't mail in the AWL get a *negative* score? Or did I jus
On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 08:51:14PM +0200, Anders Norrbring wrote:
> Shouldn't mail in the AWL get a *negative* score? Or did I just mess my
> mind up?
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/AwlWrongWay
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
QOTD:
Talk about willing people... over half of them are
I agree it's a very misleading term.
The easiest and most appropriate term I've heard is "historical
averaging".
-Original Message-
From: Bill Landry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 7:51 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.
- Original Message -
From: "Rich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 17:02:06 -0500, Rich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> So why on earth is a 17-score given to an address in an auto
white-list?
> >> Shouldn't an address get a negative score (or, at least, a neutral
zero)
> >> if
> On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 17:02:06 -0500, Rich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> So why on earth is a 17-score given to an address in an auto white-list?
>> Shouldn't an address get a negative score (or, at least, a neutral zero)
>> if it's in a WL?
>
> You may want to read up on the AWL in the WIKI - it e
On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 17:02:06 -0500, Rich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So why on earth is a 17-score given to an address in an auto white-list?
> Shouldn't an address get a negative score (or, at least, a neutral zero)
> if it's in a WL?
You may want to read up on the AWL in the WIKI - it explains
13 matches
Mail list logo
