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.org
Subject: Re: AWL confusion
----- 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 it's in a WL?
> >
> > You may want to read up on the AWL in the WIKI - it explains exactly
> > why you're seeing the scores you are.
>
> Ahh, so AWL is not a "white-list" in any way - it's a "sender history"
> score. That is quite misleading.
I agree, and that why I thought that "auto weight leveling" was a more
appropriate and correctly descriptive name than "auto whitelist". But
that's just my 2 cents...
Bill
