http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3847
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-30 21:01 ------- Subject: Re: Consider removing RFCI tests from SA 3.0 RFCI tests are more than accurate enough. I don't think we want to decide to fundamentally reject our own model of "we can use somewhat inaccurate tests by assigning weights". We can and we do. OVERALL% SPAM% HAM% S/O RANK SCORE NAME 766289 506205 260084 0.661 0.00 0.00 (all messages) 100.000 66.0593 33.9407 0.661 0.00 0.00 (all messages as %) 1.473 2.2123 0.0346 0.985 0.66 1.46 DNS_FROM_RFC_BOGUSMX 10.564 15.9113 0.1553 0.990 0.59 1.14 RCVD_IN_RFC_IPWHOIS 1.466 2.1792 0.0773 0.966 0.56 0.49 DNS_FROM_RFC_WHOIS 4.549 6.7726 0.2207 0.968 0.49 0.00 DNS_FROM_RFC_DSN 15.276 22.8917 0.4537 0.981 0.44 1.38 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST 21.889 26.9543 12.0292 0.691 0.32 0.37 DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE Given an equal 50/50 mix of spam and ham, When POST hits it is spam 98.1% of the time. We'd be nuts to not let the perceptron try using it. And the perceptron likes it too! (It doesn't like DSN, though.) If you want to be more productive, I suggest trying to come up with a way to reduce the FP rate, perhaps in discussion with the RFC-Ignorant maintainer, or via some other means. So, in conclusion, I'm still very much -1 on removing the tests, but I'm open to any improvements anyone can come up with. Maybe someone should look at those ham hits and see whether RFC-Ignorant should change their policies? I don't know, but this bug seems like the wrong place to discuss it. Cheers. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
