Apologies if this has been answered before or anything, but where/how are you generating those stats? I'm not using SA with SQL so I'm not sure if it will work for me, but those I like!
Stats in question: http://www.blue-canoe.com/stats/index.php?D1=11 Kind Regards, Philip Seccombe Turnstone Technologies NZ Limited Phone: +64 9 970 5550 Fax: +64 9 970 5559 DDI: +64 9 970 5552 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: www.turnstone.co.nz -----Original Message----- From: Nigel Frankcom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, 11 February 2007 9:23 a.m. To: Miles Fidelman Cc: SpamAssassin Users Subject: Re: A New Approach: Find the Ham On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 15:14:56 -0500, Miles Fidelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Dan wrote: >> I've developed a new approach to scoring that I want to 1) share with >> everyone and 2) make into a working system thats as accurate as what >> I've already built, but easier to use. First, the theory: >> >> NEW ASSUMPTION >> All messages are spam unless x,y,z score says they're ham. >> >> NEW APPROACH >> Block everything, then create rules to not catch what you do want. >> ie, build tests that target the spam (keeping all the tests you've >> already built), then score the thousands of ways ham triggers on those >> tests. >It strikes me that the hardest part of this approach is filtering out >too much ham. At least for me, it's more important to make sure that >people reach me, than to filter out all spam. If we take the approach >that everything is to be filtered out, except x,y,z - then the risk of >filtering out too much seems pretty high. These are my local stats... I'd far rather those numbers were the other way round. Even if Dan is wrong, at least he's thinking. http://www.blue-canoe.com/stats/index.php?D1=11 What do Theo, Matt & Co have to say? They've been doing this a lot longer than us. Kind regards
