Mike Klein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In response to my complaint of weak rules out of box:
I have rtfm (INSTALL, USAGE, website). It states (step #7 in INSTALL file):
[...]
Just use the GTUBE string for testing that SpamAssassin can correctly
mark a message as spam. The GTUBE string is
It's not abysmal. You just don't understand it. Most people get in
excess of 99% of spam with SpamAssassin. Isn't it great to know that
SpamAssassin is so well geared against false positives that you're
TRYING to send a spammy email and can't do it?
http://www.spamassassin.org/tests.html
At 11:36 PM 9/21/03 -0700, Mike Klein wrote:
Basically email consisted of an all caps subject INCREASE YOUR PEN*S SIZE
NOW!!! and several lines in the body with same text and a url to go to.
BTW, I didn't make the above typo in my email...I spelled the organ part
correctly.
snip
Why is the
Hello,
Do not assume we know which version of SA you are using. This information
is really helpful.
Do you use Bayes? (is it trained with 200 spam 200 ham)?
Do you use Auto-White List? (Possible reason for your troubles.)
You can fine tune the scores all you like, if you find a test which you
' email below.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tom
Meunier
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 4:37 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] SpamAssassin filters seem too weak out of the
box...
It's not abysmal. You just don't understand
