On Wednesday 09 September 2015 at 13:52:31, RW wrote: > On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 13:14:04 +0200 > > Antony Stone wrote: > > On Wednesday 09 September 2015 at 13:08:45, Farkas Zsolt wrote: > > > Content analysis details: (13.1 points, 15.0 required) > > > > You said earlier "it gave 10 point for badword rule but there was no > > match". > > > > I see no badword rule match getting 10 points in what you posted > > above. > > > > Are you telling us about the same message each time you post bits of > > information? > > The details of the rules are a distraction. The actual problem is that > mail is being classified as spam despite having a score under the > configured threshold.
I agree; however the inconsistent bits of information we're seeing from Farkas Zsolt make it very difficult to get a clear picture of quite what's going on under what circumstances. > The first thing to try is to reproduce it on the command line using > spamassassin -D , using the original emails from the reports. If that > doesn't work it's probably a problem with the glue, which hasn't been > mentioned yet. I suspect you're spot on with that last part. Antony. -- BASIC is to computer languages what Roman numerals are to arithmetic. Please reply to the list; please *don't* CC me.