https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6386
Darxus <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|major |critical --- Comment #4 from Darxus <[email protected]> 2011-11-08 17:53:46 UTC --- Can I get some other opinions on what the ham age limit should be? There's a nice graphical representation of the problem in this graph: http://www.chaosreigns.com/dnswl/ham.svg See that big hump on the right at the top, the light blue "At least None" line? Where it goes from ~50, up to 60-62 for a while, then back down to ~47? That 29% drop at the end was due to JM's corpora being added back, with his mostly 3 to 4 year old ham corpus which is comprising 30% of our ham used for re-scoring. That "At least None" line represents the percent of ham that hits any rank of DNSWL.org. And it shows that using so much data that's so old is really screwing up how accurately we measure the performance of things like white lists. 20110806 50.6 20110813 50.3545 bb present 20110820 50.5765 20110910 62.304 20110917 62.406 20110924 61.4487 20111001 60.9607 bb missing 20111008 60.9483 20111015 60.5923 20111022 61.6126 20111029 47.4826 bb present 20111105 47.6509 I realize this problem is critically linked to fixing our ability to add new masscheck accounts, but I'd like to try to get consensus on what the ham age limit should be changed to. -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
