Maybe it's because I'm filtering my SPAM for later manual "safety" screening as opposed to deleting it completely, but it seems like some of the algorithmically generated scores just pussy-foot around too much. Here's are scores for a recent slip-through, a common pyramid scheme message:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.8 required=5.0 tests= FOR_FREE = 0.211 SUBJ_REMOVE = 0.062 LINES_OF_YELLING = 0.453 RAZOR_CHECK version=2.20 = 3.0 (a manual score, soon to be 5.0) Without the manual score, the message practically qualifies as inter-personal mail. SA does not give any credit to the cumulative effect that would be obvious to any human reading the "tests=" line, let alone the message itself. I mean, look at *this* one!" X-Spam-Status: No, hits=4.0 required=5.0 tests=SUBJ_ENDS_IN_Q_MARK,COPYRIGHT_CLAIMED,CLICK_BELOW,WEB_BUGS,MAILTO_LINK,RCVD_IN_OSIRUSOFT_COM,X_OSIRU_SPAM_SRC version=2.20 It's freakin' toxic, and it gets a 4? SEVEN rule hits? Hmm... might be SPAM. How about a "bonus" for cumulative effect? Why not do a second-level analysis after scoring; something like: 3 positive score matches - add 1.0 4 positive score matches - add 2.0 5 positive score matches - add 4.0 6 positive score matches - add 8.0 /// Rob _______________________________________________________________ Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
