John Tice wrote: > > Greetings, > This is my first post after having lurked some. So, I'm getting these > same "RE: good" spams but they're hitting eight rules and typically > scoring between 30 and 40. I'm really unsophisticated compared to you > guys, and it begs the question––what am I doing wrong? All I use is a > tweaked user_prefs wherein I have gradually raised the scores on > standard rules found in spam that slips through over a period of time. > These particular spams are over the top on bayesian (1.0), have > multiple database hits, forged rcvd_helo and so forth. Bayesian alone > flags them for me. I'm trying to understand the reason you would not > want to have these type of rules set high enough? I must be way over > optimized––what am I not getting?
BAYES_99, by definition, has a 1% false positive rate.
