Ben Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Actually the test I use is same host (allowing but not requiring) > different documents.
Unfortunately, the S/O ratio is not quite good enough, but I think it could be improved. See this ticket for more information: http://www.hughes-family.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=891 > My feeling is that you can't get a false positive for a newsletter if you > never sign up for any. :) If you notice my high hitrate for this rule > you can see that someone out there thinks I want their newsletters. > > Besides, the whole reason I switched to SA from junkfilter was so that > I could have low scoring (and IMO, anything around ~1.0 is low scoring) > rules that sometimes mean spam instead of only boolean "is this spam" > tests. Unfortunately, I don't have much time to work on this test right now. I think it's good enough to work on some more, though. Ben, perhaps you could pick up further development? Dan ------------------------------------------------------- Sponsored by: AMD - Your access to the experts on Hammer Technology! Open Source & Linux Developers, register now for the AMD Developer Symposium. Code: EX8664 http://www.developwithamd.com/developerlab _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
