I'll revert - I was involved in the initial conversation with davej - I was under the impression this was the initial intention but ruleqa was re-adjusting score to 0.1
Paul On 21/03/2019, 21:24, "Bill Cole" <[email protected]> wrote: I'm extremely uneasy with this. We should not be manually scoring an essentially untested/unproven DNS-based list that is outside of project control at such a powerful level. DNSBLs tend to decay into "list the world" mode eventually after they die, often far sooner than anyone intends or expects. (FWIW: locally I'm scoring DKIMWL_* at 0.001 because I have no basis for believing it to be useful, yet.) On 21 Mar 2019, at 16:16, [email protected] wrote: > Author: pds > Date: Thu Mar 21 20:16:30 2019 > New Revision: 1856009 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1856009&view=rev > Log: > Adjust the score for DKIMWL > > Modified: > spamassassin/trunk/rules/73_sandbox_manual_scores.cf > > Modified: spamassassin/trunk/rules/73_sandbox_manual_scores.cf > URL: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/trunk/rules/73_sandbox_manual_scores.cf?rev=1856009&r1=1856008&r2=1856009&view=diff > ============================================================================== > --- spamassassin/trunk/rules/73_sandbox_manual_scores.cf (original) > +++ spamassassin/trunk/rules/73_sandbox_manual_scores.cf Thu Mar 21 > 20:16:30 2019 > @@ -83,4 +83,5 @@ score FILL_THIS_FORM_LONG 2.00 > # Lots of hate; score as informative hammy, may override locally > score RP_MATCHES_RCVD -0.001 > > - > +# pds > +score DKIMWL_WL_HIGH -7.5 -- Bill Cole Paul Stead Senior Engineer Zen Internet
