Re: sa-update (nightly mass-check)

2014-04-09 Thread Thomas Harold
On 4/8/2014 6:56 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
 Yes, we can make accounts again.  Did you send a request?
 
 However, the ham is not starved.  We have been publishing rules. Not
 sure where the disconnect on the firing of the script is coming from.
 
 Regards,
 KAM
 
 

Assisting in the mass-check is on my to-do list later this year.  I have
a mail account that gets 80+ spam per day and I get 5-30 outside mails
each day.




Re: sa-update (nightly mass-check)

2014-04-09 Thread Kevin A. McGrail

On 4/9/2014 2:53 PM, Thomas Harold wrote:

On 4/8/2014 6:56 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:

Yes, we can make accounts again.  Did you send a request?

However, the ham is not starved.  We have been publishing rules. Not
sure where the disconnect on the firing of the script is coming from.

Regards,
KAM



Assisting in the mass-check is on my to-do list later this year.  I have
a mail account that gets 80+ spam per day and I get 5-30 outside mails
each day.

Every little bit helps!


Re: sa-update (nightly mass-check)

2014-04-08 Thread Kevin A. McGrail

On 4/8/2014 1:16 AM, Dave Warren wrote:

On 2014-04-07 19:23, Thomas Harold wrote:
NOTE: New masscheck contributors are now being accepted since about 
2012-08-09.

Is that supposed to say now being or not being?


I'm assuming now being since there are regular mentions of a need 
for ham corpus. But that's just a hopeful guess, given that I've put 
some resources into setting up appropriate systems and preparing some 
messages to start the process.



Yes, we can make accounts again.  Did you send a request?

However, the ham is not starved.  We have been publishing rules. Not 
sure where the disconnect on the firing of the script is coming from.


Regards,
KAM




Re: sa-update (nightly mass-check)

2014-04-08 Thread John Hardin

On Mon, 7 Apr 2014, Dave Warren wrote:


On 2014-04-07 19:23, Thomas Harold wrote:
  NOTE: New masscheck contributors are now being accepted since about 
  2012-08-09.

 Is that supposed to say now being or not being?


I'm assuming now being since there are regular mentions of a need for ham 
corpus. But that's just a hopeful guess, given that I've put some resources 
into setting up appropriate systems and preparing some messages to start the 
process.


Get in touch with Kevin McGrail for submission credentials.

--
 John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
 jhar...@impsec.orgFALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhar...@impsec.org
 key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C  AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
---
  Maxim XI: Everything is air-droppable at least once.
---
 5 days until Thomas Jefferson's 271st Birthday


Re: sa-update (nightly mass-check)

2014-04-08 Thread Dave Warren

On 2014-04-08 03:56, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:

On 4/8/2014 1:16 AM, Dave Warren wrote:

On 2014-04-07 19:23, Thomas Harold wrote:
NOTE: New masscheck contributors are now being accepted since about 
2012-08-09.

Is that supposed to say now being or not being?


I'm assuming now being since there are regular mentions of a need 
for ham corpus. But that's just a hopeful guess, given that I've put 
some resources into setting up appropriate systems and preparing some 
messages to start the process.



Yes, we can make accounts again.  Did you send a request?


Indeed, I sent a message to private@ as described on the wiki.



However, the ham is not starved.  We have been publishing rules. Not 
sure where the disconnect on the firing of the script is coming from.


Understood. However, over the last couple years, there have been 
multiple times that this was mentioned (whether it was actually true or 
not), which is what motivated me to attempt to contribute.


--
Dave Warren
http://www.hireahit.com/
http://ca.linkedin.com/in/davejwarren




Re: sa-update (nightly mass-check)

2014-04-08 Thread Kevin A. McGrail

On 4/8/2014 2:15 PM, Dave Warren wrote:

On 2014-04-08 03:56, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:

On 4/8/2014 1:16 AM, Dave Warren wrote:

On 2014-04-07 19:23, Thomas Harold wrote:
NOTE: New masscheck contributors are now being accepted since 
about 2012-08-09.

Is that supposed to say now being or not being?


I'm assuming now being since there are regular mentions of a need 
for ham corpus. But that's just a hopeful guess, given that I've put 
some resources into setting up appropriate systems and preparing 
some messages to start the process.



Yes, we can make accounts again.  Did you send a request?


Indeed, I sent a message to private@ as described on the wiki.

OK, cc me and send again please.  it might not have been moderated through.


Re: sa-update (nightly mass-check)

2014-04-08 Thread Dave Warren

On 2014-04-08 11:17, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:

On 4/8/2014 2:15 PM, Dave Warren wrote:

On 2014-04-08 03:56, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:

On 4/8/2014 1:16 AM, Dave Warren wrote:

On 2014-04-07 19:23, Thomas Harold wrote:
NOTE: New masscheck contributors are now being accepted since 
about 2012-08-09.

Is that supposed to say now being or not being?


I'm assuming now being since there are regular mentions of a need 
for ham corpus. But that's just a hopeful guess, given that I've 
put some resources into setting up appropriate systems and 
preparing some messages to start the process.



Yes, we can make accounts again.  Did you send a request?


Indeed, I sent a message to private@ as described on the wiki.
OK, cc me and send again please.  it might not have been moderated 
through.


Sent and CC'd, thanks!

--
Dave Warren
http://www.hireahit.com/
http://ca.linkedin.com/in/davejwarren




Re: sa-update (nightly mass-check)

2014-04-07 Thread Thomas Harold
On 4/5/2014 12:14 PM, John Hardin wrote:
 On Sat, 5 Apr 2014, Amir Reza Rahbaran wrote:
 
 I want to know how long it takes custom signatures updated by sa-update.
 
 Daily, if the corpora are sufficient for masscheck scoring to run.
 
 At the moment the masscheck corpus is ham-starved. There's not quite
 enough ham available for reliable scores to be generated and published.
 

http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/NightlyMassCheck

 NOTE: New masscheck contributors are now being accepted since about 
 2012-08-09. 

Is that supposed to say now being or not being?



Re: sa-update (nightly mass-check)

2014-04-07 Thread Dave Warren

On 2014-04-07 19:23, Thomas Harold wrote:

NOTE: New masscheck contributors are now being accepted since about 2012-08-09.

Is that supposed to say now being or not being?


I'm assuming now being since there are regular mentions of a need for 
ham corpus. But that's just a hopeful guess, given that I've put some 
resources into setting up appropriate systems and preparing some 
messages to start the process.


--
Dave Warren
http://www.hireahit.com/
http://ca.linkedin.com/in/davejwarren