https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6525
--- Comment #22 from Henrik Krohns <[email protected]> 2010-12-29 14:18:46 UTC --- > Hi. No response to this regarding FP's? > > I'm sorry, but the raw numbers do not support the idea of "extra confidence" > when the spam hit rate is this low and relative FP's are this high. None of > the counter-arguments have are being argued from the statistics. > > Again, the overall impact is so negligible here that it is not worthwhile to > argue if this is upsetting you. If this is really an issue of "we don't make > changes like this between major releases" then I'm willing to defer this > proposal for now. What do you mean by relative FPs? I get see much more FP counts with BRBL and friends, that's what counts. Relative or not. NJABL_SPAM seems to be "worst" of the bunch and is scored lower. NJABL_PROXY seems to useful rule without THAT much overlap. What other blacklists scan for open proxies? I'm open for score tuning, but as already said, how will you tell users to enable some disabled by default rule? Yeah why don't we just enable maybe two of the best BLs to save traffic, and write in documentation that they can uncomment others if they want.. -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
