"Michael Moncur" said:
> Some of the mutations are great spam indicators. No legitimate mailing list > would include a tagline like "this is emailed speech without prejudice" or > "send a postcard to unsubscribe" or "to be removed, call 1-800-xxx-xxxx". > Perhaps SA should focus more on those and less on simple things like "click > here to unsubscribe". yep -- exactly! > Personally I'd vote for moving the ambiguous ones into a separate file and > scoring them low by default. I would give them all high scores on my > personal system since I whitelist all of the mailing lists I subscribe to, > but we shouldn't expect most users to bother with things like that. > > Of course, having negative rules for common mailing list software / systems > would accomplish the same thing. (Not hugely negative, just enough to claw > back a few points.) Actually, there's another bad side-effect of over-FPing patterns I forgot to mention -- it can encourage bad feeling among the users. Rules like PORN_14 contain *really* common words and phrases like "pics" and "years old", and it's described as "words and phrases which indicate porn". If a user finds that SpamAssassin has marked up the latest family missive with pictures of their granddaughter (let's say ;), accusing it of using "words and phrases which indicate porn", they're *not* going to be impressed by SpamAssassin's accuracy and it's more likely to result in a mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. (Mind you, that's also a description problem... that rule should give a much clearer indication of what it matches.) --j. ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Caffeinated soap. No kidding. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
