Hallöchen! Bill Cole writes:
> [...] > > Indicates that someone has sabotaged your SA scores. Those are > entirely insane scores for those tests. If the default values were > used, that message would not have been misclassified. I myself set those values, almost 10 years ago. They have served very well through those times with 15.000 spams/year. And in the first two years, I even inspected all spam mails and had not a single false positive. > [...] Razor (like Cloudmark Authority, its commercial cousin) does > poorly with low-occurrence URLs. That's why razor-whitelist > exists. Use it. I maintain whitelists for spam as a whole, but I don't want to additionally maintain whitelists for subsystems of it. > And don't trust whoever set your BAYES and RAZOR scores to have > anything to do with your spam control. Well, I don't trust Razor anymore! If there is such a thing as "the opposite of spam", then these mails. Besides, I personally see no point in a crowdsourcing tool with scores on the level of "HTML_IMAGE_ONLY". Anyway, thank you very much for the clarification and explanations! Regards, Torsten. -- Torsten Bronger Jabber ID: torsten.bron...@jabber.rwth-aachen.de
