--As of February 17, 2014 2:54:11 PM +0000, RW is alleged to have said:
On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 09:09:33 -0500
Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 2/17/2014 8:43 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> Hello,
>
> seems after last rule update we've got new rule BAYES_99 in
> 72_scores.cf but
> without score (and thus default 1.0) in 50_scores.cf.
>
> ... a mistake happened apparently?
>
I'll look and see. I've never tried to promote a bayes rule so it
might need to bypass sandbox.
I have spam that's already hitting BAYES_999 with the default 1.0 score.
--As for the rest, it is mine.
Same here - it's causing a fair amount of FNs, as I have BAYES_99 set with
a 4.7 score, so this is lowering the spam score for a lot of mail.
Daniel T. Staal
---------------------------------------------------------------
This email copyright the author. Unless otherwise noted, you
are expressly allowed to retransmit, quote, or otherwise use
the contents for non-commercial purposes. This copyright will
expire 5 years after the author's death, or in 30 years,
whichever is longer, unless such a period is in excess of
local copyright law.
---------------------------------------------------------------
