On 03/03/2016 08:21 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 03.03.2016 um 19:39 schrieb RW:
On Thu, 3 Mar 2016 18:51:45 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 03.03.2016 um 17:54 schrieb RW:
On Thu, 3 Mar 2016 15:18:36 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
it would at best end in the rule get such a low score that it is
the same as disable it entirely - so the only correct thing to do
is stop the foolish deep-header parsing
why?
because *then* it would no longer hit any relevant amount of ham
and QA corpus over time could score it higher in a safe way
If that were supported by the corpus it would already have
happened
how do you suppose the corpus to replace ones own thinking about the
*conditions* rules hit?
I've no idea what the sentence means.
the deep-header rules have to go away or rewritten to *not* do
deep-header tests - was that really so hard to parse?
That YOU don't like deep header parsing rule doesn't mean that they're
useless.
Maybe it's time that you, as a self proclamied perfectionist, fork SA
and do your thing.
Time to bury the dead horse.
