On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 03:44:45PM -0400, [email protected] wrote: > > I do not disagree with this. I think increasing the score of the > spamhause rules would be fine. The only reason I stopped automatically > rejecting everything in zen at my MTA was to collect better data for > things like masscheck. Funny, huh? I wonder how many more false > positives aren't showing up in masscheck / rule QA / score generation > because the contributor never sees them due to using zen at their MTA. > > Rule QA output certainly suggests we're missing that data for that reason > in several of the corpora.
You are right that mass checker setups may vary wildly. I sure know my old corpus was heavily biased since MTA checks were very strict. Mostly my spam was hard-to-catch freemail crap which raised freemail-rule scores considerably. This is why I don't bother to participate anymore. SA needs profiles like "mta-blocking used" and "no mta-blocking used".. While interessting, I couldn't care less if zen had "more FPs" than mass checks show. It's still used pretty much everywhere (if you are listed, you are screwed) and the FP rate is too small to care (I never saw FPs on my 50k/day traffic).
