https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5817
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-02-24 12:55 ------- (In reply to comment #33) > (In reply to comment #32) > > Zero ham hits is nice, but with S/O ratios like those two rules have, its > > nothing to be particularly concerned about. Either of those rules look > > good to > > me. > > Thanks for that comment, Loren -- this pretty much is what I have been > wondering > about myself (see comment 22). Is a single FP worth chasing? How does it > affect > the score? Of course, I like my proposed rules to be sharp and effective. And > of > course, I want it to score as much as possible by default. ;) If you look at the "STATISTICS*" files in the rules dir of the distribution, that gives examples of FP rates and how they effect the assigned scores in terms of GA output. > I know about my spam, and I monitor it for any FP. But getting the rule > upstream > will affect users and admins all over the world. The latter is new to me, and > I > can't push new rules anyway -- I rely upon your judgement, which one to pick. > There are two and a half options IMHO: > > (a) Go with either variant A or B as is. The most simple RE. There's one FP in > the current mass-check corpus, and a second FP previously recorded by > Chris. > > A trivial adjustment is, to modify these to exclude all private IP rather > than localhost only, as per my original plugin. Would get rid of the > current > single FP. Would not do that for the expired FP by Chris. Needs another > round of testing to gather results. > > (b) Go with variant C, which adds an additional, not-so-trivial constraint. > Rewriting this into a single RE pending, needs testing. > > Neither of these affects the hits on ham and spam significantly. Opinions? > Your > call. I'd be most happy to provide whatever variant you prefer or would like > to > see results for. personally I'd vote for (a) with the private-IP exclusion. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
