On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 07:12:35AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote: > Henrik K <h...@hege.li> writes: > > > From what I've seen, it's very uncommon to use this format. Why rely on > > some vague previously defined score, which can change at any time? Just set > > a static score you like and fits your system. > > It's not vague; it's the score which is defined by the distributed > rules. > > My intent is to say that I want 1 point more than what the rules say, > and I mean that to float with rule changes.
It _is_ vague. It's either an educated static score the developer gave, or a corpus generated score, both which might not reflect your personal mailflow at all. > Perhaps you are arguing that all uses of () are confused and thus we > should lean to removing that facility. I just think it's much more common to create meta that checks if the rule you are interested in hit, and add to scoring that way. Yes I realize by that logic things are vague as well, *shrug*. But if you use a non-common method, it's possible that there are bugs and strangness as we now found out.
