From: "Loren Wilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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?
The danger with tweaking standard rule scores you probably already know: you
are at least theoretically likely to get more false positives, because the
score set was optimized for the original scores.
Of course, everyone tweaks a few scores at least. After all, that is why
they are tweakable. As long as you watch you spam bucket for FPs you can go
pretty high on things. Looking at today's spam I only see one of these, but
it scored around 30. I have a bunch of the Re: news kind that all scored
35-39.
Loren
And most of those which are not black lists are from 88_FVGT_body.cf.
{^_^} Joanne
