Hello Kris,
Friday, April 12, 2013, 4:23:55 PM, you wrote:
KD> I see the score showing a little less in the current update:
KD> score RP_MATCHES_RCVD -0.551 -1.344 -0.551 -1.344
Since gone back up :(
score RP_MATCHES_RCVD -0.553 -2.438 -0.553 -2.438
Hi,
> > we'll continue to monitor the stock values. I didn't realize the
> > corpus could lack the volume to get a more accurate calculation.
>
> It's more a matter of balance and diversity than volume.
>
Ah, okay, that makes sense.
Somewhat related, but can I ask if anyone has rules to score t
On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 19:07:39 -0400
Alex wrote:
> we'll continue to monitor the stock values. I didn't realize the
> corpus could lack the volume to get a more accurate calculation.
It's more a matter of balance and diversity than volume.
Hello Kris,
Monday, April 15, 2013, 8:34:55 PM, you wrote:
KD> There seems to be a lame server:
Still is!
dig +short 2.3.3.updates.spamassassin.org txt @ns.hyperreal.org.
"1462428"
dig +short 2.3.3.updates.spamassassin.org txt @a.auth-ns.sonic.net.
"1468800"
--
Best regards,
Niamh
Hi,
> I can understand adjusting the values slightly for each user's
> > particular situation, but doesn't it generally throw off the balance of
> > how the email as a whole is weighted when you adjust values in that way?
>
> If a rule is causing undesired behaviour (for this particular rule,
> f
Alex wrote:
> I can understand adjusting the values slightly for each user's
> particular situation, but doesn't it generally throw off the balance of
> how the email as a whole is weighted when you adjust values in that way?
If a rule is causing undesired behaviour (for this particular rule,
fals
his mailing list :-D
Original Message
Subject: Subject: Fusemail Technical Support for Case - 03278437
ref:_00D301Siv._50060Ppgo5:ref – Re: URL spam and RP_MATCHES_RCVD
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 13:29:34 + (GMT)
From: techsupp...@fusemail.com
To: n...@unixmail.co.uk
Thank you for you
On 16/04/13 00:07, Alex wrote:
Hi,
But I stand by my local.cf entry reducing RP_MATCHES_RCVD to an advisory
-0.001; it may be useful in combination with other rules, but I don't
think it's valuable enough on its own to have even -0.5 points. I can't
say I've seen any evidence in the mail s
Hi,
> But I stand by my local.cf entry reducing RP_MATCHES_RCVD to an advisory
> -0.001; it may be useful in combination with other rules, but I don't
> think it's valuable enough on its own to have even -0.5 points. I can't
> say I've seen any evidence in the mail stream I deal with that scori
Niamh Holding wrote:
> Friday, April 12, 2013, 4:23:55 PM, you wrote:
>
> KD> score RP_MATCHES_RCVD -0.551 -1.344 -0.551 -1.344
>
> I'm seeing-
>
> score RP_MATCHES_RCVD -0.552 -2.373 -0.552 -2.373
>
> But perhaps there is something odd, I'm seeing th
On 15/04/13 18:46, Niamh Holding wrote:
Hello Kris,
Friday, April 12, 2013, 4:23:55 PM, you wrote:
KD> score RP_MATCHES_RCVD -0.551 -1.344 -0.551 -1.344
I'm seeing-
score RP_MATCHES_RCVD -0.552 -2.373 -0.552 -2.373
But perhaps there is something o
Hello Kris,
Friday, April 12, 2013, 4:23:55 PM, you wrote:
KD> score RP_MATCHES_RCVD -0.551 -1.344 -0.551 -1.344
I'm seeing-
score RP_MATCHES_RCVD -0.552 -2.373 -0.552 -2.373
But perhaps there is something odd, I'm seeing that my current version
is
Alex wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm now receiving spam that contains little more than a URL that keeps
> it from matching my "body uri only" rules because of a little additional
> junk in the body, and apparently is sent from legitimate compromised
> yahoo accounts, resulting in -2.4 points being subtracted
On 11.04.13 18:56, Alex wrote:
I'm now receiving spam that contains little more than a URL that keeps it
from matching my "body uri only" rules because of a little additional junk
in the body, and apparently is sent from legitimate compromised yahoo
accounts, resulting in -2.4 points being subtra
Hi,
> I'm now receiving spam that contains little more than a URL that keeps
> > it from matching my "body uri only" rules because of a little
> > additional junk in the body, and apparently is sent from legitimate
> > compromised yahoo accounts, resulting in -2.4 points being subtracted.
> >
> B
On Thu, 2013-04-11 at 18:56 -0400, Alex wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> I'm now receiving spam that contains little more than a URL that keeps
> it from matching my "body uri only" rules because of a little
> additional junk in the body, and apparently is sent from legitimate
> compromised yahoo accounts, res
16 matches
Mail list logo
