Am 16.09.2014 um 16:20 schrieb John Hardin: > On Tue, 16 Sep 2014, Reindl Harald wrote: >> Am 16.09.2014 um 16:01 schrieb John Hardin: >>> On Tue, 16 Sep 2014, Reindl Harald wrote: >>>>> Le 16/09/2014 12:24, Reindl Harald a écrit : >>>>>> score LIST_PARTIAL 2.000 1.999 2.000 1.999 >>>>>> >>>>>> that feels too high, as example we add "List-Unsubscribe" headers in >>>>>> case of ordiany newsletters to support MUA >>>>>> which read that header (for TB a extension exists) >>>> >>>> i have seen that rule hit one customers newsletter generated here, going >>>> through a relay responsible for the >>>> sender domain and coming back to the customer itself why it makes it >>>> through SA >>> >>> Important question: are those messages being scored as spam? >>> >>> If not, how close to spam (5.0) are they being scored? >>> Are you willing to provide a sample of one such? >> >> in that case not, but depends on some wired HTML, bad chosen >> subject or so hit another rule where 2 points penalty may >> come closer to spam, keep in mind nobody knows how good or >> bad a bayes on the RCPT side maybe trained >> >> what alarmed me was not that our SA in that specific case >> had -1 and not -3 but that a message with a header added >> by good intentions get a high penalty in general > > 2 points is not a "high penalty". 4+ points is a "high penalty".
depends on the environment, in case of a wrong trained bayse (all sort of newsletters trained as spam instead unsubscribe which is also the reason for many RBL entries, frankly i saw persons report the newsletter sent from the own brothers company to AOL as spam instead click on unsubscribe) it may be the 2 points lead to reject the message :-) > Regardless, I've reviewed the recent performance and adjusted the score limit > a bit thank you
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
