<shouts>NOT TOO BAD????!!!! That's MISERABLE!</shouts>
OK OK I have become spoiled by success. I get upset if even one spam gets
by in a day. That's a 99.5% to 99.7% hit rate on spam. Typically I get
maybe 1 Linux Kernel mauling (typu intended) list that triggers too many
chickenpox rules and gets marked as spam. And maybe once a week or less
often I get a false hit on real email. That's with a total email count
of about 800 to 1400 per day, typically. That's .1% tagged ham due to
acknowledged "faulty setup" and a peculiar mailing list. If I exclude
the LKML false postives it's close to ten times better, 0.01% ham tagged
as spam.
Now THOSE are figures to shoot for and enjoy. Careful, though. When you
get there you will discover that any lapses, errors on SpamAssassin's
part, seem to loom ever so much larger. It may lead you to the silliness
of writing new custom rules for yourself to eliminate that one a day
screwup.
{^_-} Joanne <- LOVES SpamAssassin, she does. The down side is that
I find myself actually reading spam to see how it got up to a
score of 85+ in 12 lines with no score over 6.2 points. (I see
that the SARE rules have picked up on poxy mortgage spams so I
have duplicate rules for the same thing. I'm not motivated to
change that, either. {^_-} That email also triggered every one
of the BLs. He tried harder.)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Friday, January 7, 2005, 8:43:30 AM, Jerry Jerry wrote:
> > I currently use the spamcop RBL..
>
> to you mean bl.spamcop.net or sc.surbl.org. The two are not
> the same.
>
> > This morning I had 96 spam messages. 77 were detected by SA.
>
> Do you mean an 80% detection rate? That's not too bad, though
> it can be improved.
>
> Jeff C.
