On Fri, Jan 19, 2007 at 10:07:53AM +0000, Justin Mason wrote: > > Thank you. That explains it then. I suppose there is no fix for the false > > positives then? Since its the total message size. I began thinking that > > 1.6 points is not an FP. it's expected that some rules *will* fire > on ham -- but just not in conjunction with enough *other* rules to > push it over the 5-point threshold.
Well, we use FP in two different ways. The top quote is saying "false positive" in terms of rule hits. The bottom quote is saying "FP" in terms of overall message ham/spam determination. Rules may FP, and scores are generated appropriately so that the overall number of message FPs are as close to 0 as possible.
pgp0oQfA8VKmg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
