Rob Blomquist wrote:
> I am trying to figure out which rulesets are important
> to me, and which ones aren't.
One thing that I found helpful in determining what was going on with
mail that wasn't trapped as spam was to modify the format of the
X-Spam-Status header line to include the score for each rule that
was matched.
(This info is, of course, already included in the "content analysis
details" for mail that is identified as spam.)
I did this by putting the following line (a single long line) in my
configuration:
add_header all Status _YESNO_, hits=_HITS_ required=_REQD_ tests=_TESTSSCORES_
autolearn=_AUTOLEARN_ version=_VERSION_
This is the same as the default, except that the default has
tests=_TESTS_ (listing the matched tests but not their scores;
_TESTSSCORES_ includes the scores).
An example of what an X-Spam-Status line looks like with the above
configuration change:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL=0.325,HTML_MESSAGE=0.1,
RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.5 autolearn=no version=2.64
Rich Wales [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.richw.org
