jdow wrote on Friday, June 10, 2005: >1) You need to visit http://www.rulesemporium.com/ and select at least > a few of the SARE rules sets. They do really help SA performance.
I'm checking these out now. >2) I found best results here if I bucked up the BAYES_99 rule to 5 > points. So far I have not seen that trigger a ham message with per > user Bayes. That per user Bayes is important. Shared Bayes is not > nearly as effective and should be banned in Boston - and the rest > of the world, too. It's a copout. Users MUST be prepared to help > by training their personal filters. Otherwise they must accept > increased spam escapes. I'm bumping up my Bayes scores in just a few minutes. We'll see what happens. As for per-user Bayes, I'm afriad that's simply out of the question. I have one user who still won't use subject lines, and another who hasn't figured out how to address e-mail yet (she just uses Reply). Seriously. Trying to explain Bayes filtering would be an exercise in futility. I have to provide a server-side solution and manage it myself, or do nothing at all. >3) 3.0.4 is out. It installs nicely. (But give it a lot of time for > some of its tests. My first shot at a CPAN install I thought it > had died or locked up on a couple tests.) Does it make that much of a difference over 3.0.2? If so, I might take a shot at upgrading later this month or next, when I get the time. -- James Bucanek <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
