Thank you, I am running all.spamrats.com, also it may a huge different when I took the recipient off whitelist.
Thanks for all your support. On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas <uh...@fantomas.sk> wrote: > reject_rbl_client all.spamrats.com <http://all.spamrats.com/> >>> >> > On 29.05.14 13:17, Alex wrote: > >> What's that? That doesn't really have a reputation here, and it's not >> going >> to be more effective than zen or barracuda. Set up your RBLs so they're >> weighted. Implement postscreen with postfix. >> > > 5 years ago I have posted question about this blacklist: > http://marc.info/?l=spamassassin-users&m=123920398923786&w=2 > > X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.147 tagged_above=-999 required=5.3____ >>> tests=[BAYES_99=4.5, BAYES_999=0.2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,____ >>> MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.723, RDNS_NONE=2.013, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01,____ >>> URIBL_BLACK=1.7, USER_IN_WHITELIST_TO=-6] autolearn=no >>> >> >> Why is this user whitelisted if you consider it to be spam? >> > > it's the recipient that is whitelisted. In such case it is really silly to > blame SA for not marking _any_ mail as spam... > > > -- > Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ > Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. > Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. > Microsoft dick is soft to do no harm >
