Re[2]: [SAtalk] Another v word got through

2004-01-31 Thread Matt Kettler
Sweet.. thanks man, I've been meaning to run mass-check on it myself.. I've been wondering about the FPs in the MALEDYSFUNCTION rules.. it's obvious all the FPs hit both it and obfu, which is weird. I've had several technical mails hit, but upon trying to re-test them and get them to hit, they

Re[3]: [SAtalk] Another v word got through

2004-01-29 Thread Robert Menschel
Hello Matt, Wednesday, January 28, 2004, 7:59:48 PM, you wrote: MK Sweet.. thanks man, I've been meaning to run mass-check on it myself.. MK I've been wondering about the FPs in the MALEDYSFUNCTION rules.. it's MK obvious all the FPs hit both it and obfu, which is weird. MK I've had several

Re: [SAtalk] Another v word got through

2004-01-28 Thread Matt Kettler
At 12:13 PM 1/26/04 -0500, WA9ALS - John wrote: This one even has the V word spelled correctly as part of a bigger word. How is it getting past the DRUGS and MRWIGGLY rules? http://wa9als.com/spam2.html I've gotten a couple of these now and have added a body check for the grax word, but that

[SAtalk] Another v word got through

2004-01-26 Thread WA9ALS - John
This one even has the V word spelled correctly as part of a bigger word. How is it getting past the DRUGS and MRWIGGLY rules? http://wa9als.com/spam2.html I've gotten a couple of these now and have added a body check for the grax word, but that seems like a bandaid. Tnx - John