On Thu, 22 May 2014 15:54:42 +0100 RW <rwmailli...@googlemail.com> wrote:
Ian> But in fact this is a per-test setting, a subcategory of tflags. Ian> Do I have to specify it separately for every test? Why? RW> The point is to set it for a small number of rules that are RW> sufficiently strong as to guarantee there will be no mislearning in RW> combination with the autolearn as spam threshold. So, now I am really confused. I think I did everything right in user_prefs: bayes_auto_learn 1 bayes_auto_learn_threshold_nonspam -2.00 bayes_auto_learn_threshold_spam 6.00 bayes_auto_learn_on_error 0 [snip] tflags URIBL_DBL_SPAM autolearn_force tflags URIBL_JP_SURBL autolearn_force tflags URIBL_BLACK autolearn_force tflags INVALID_DATE autolearn_force Nonetheless: X-Spam-Score: 6.9 X-Spam-Tests: BAYES_99=3.5,BAYES_999=0.2,HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.723,RDNS_NONE=0.793,SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01,URIBL_BLACK=1.7 X-Spam-Autolearn: no autolearn_force=no ???? One suspect thing I see in the log: May 24 20:29:58 host spamd[13561]: spamd: result: Y 6 - BAYES_99,BAYES_999,HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST,HTM L_MESSAGE,MIME_HTML_ONLY,RDNS_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_REMOTE_IMAGE,URIBL_BLACK scantime=1.9,size=6208,user=itz, uid=1000,required_score=4.3,rhost=127.0.0.1,raddr=127.0.0.1,rport=60231,mid=<23931386609892239320827813 806...@86adv5n4.disabilism.eu>,bayes=1.000000,autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Note the 6 - is it possible that SA truncates the score to an integer for this purpose, and then treats it as a strict lower bound - that is, if I set bayes_auto_learn_threshold_spam = 6.00, the lowest score to actually trigger autolearn would be 7? That is the only rational explanation I have, tortured as it is. It sure looks like SA is going out of its way to force me to do manual training :-( -- Please *no* private copies of mailing list or newsgroup messages.
