On 3/7/11 4:13 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Mon, 7 Mar 2011, Adam Katz wrote:
On 03/06/2011 11:33 AM, Karsten Br�ckelmann wrote:
On Sun, 2011-03-06 at 10:51 -0800, JP Kelly wrote:
>>>> I just found an incoming message which is ham but marked as spam.
>>>> It received a score of 14 because it is in the auto white-list.
>>>> Shouldn't it receive a negative score?
>>> http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/AwlWrongWay
>>>
>>> Despite its name, the AWL is a score averager, based on the sender's
>>> history (limited by net-block).
>> I encountered that misconception so much that I altered its description
>> it in my local.cf:
>> describe AWL Adjust score towards average for this sender
>> As a reminder, SVN trunk uses:
>> describe AWL From: address is in the auto white-list
>> Even if we don't change what "AWL" means, we don't need to spell it out
>> as often. Cleaning up the docs would certainly be useful, but simply
>> changing the description would cover most of the ground for us.
> Open a boog for it.
I prefer to call AWL HEAT ( Heuristic Email Address Tracking )
You might be interested in my version of a utility sa-heatu documented at
http://www.real-world-systems.com/mail/sa-heatu.html
I have tried to clarify how HEAT works at
http://www.real-world-systems.com/mail/sa-heatu.html#backgrnd
which adds aging so as to loose old entries otherwise kept forever.
I also have some thoughts about discarding "hammers" at the end of that
document.
Any feedback on this would be welcome.
Dennis German
