alan, You're right, the meta rule for this is simple enough. I guess I was just so surprised that this was normal behavior. I understand why this is the case, it just wasn't expected.
Thanks for the advice, take care! -- Michael alan premselaar wrote: >On 04.3.3 7:57 AM, "Michael Haren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >...snip... > > >>Now I must ask, does anyone know of any convenient way to scan only the >>body of the message, without the subject? Without creating meta >>rules/etc. I didn't see this as an option. >> >>As it seems, if you have the same phrase in both the body and subject, >>you cannot tell if it actually appears in the body at all. You can only >>determine that it is in the subject, and _might_ be in the body. >> >>Of course if it is in the body but NOT in the subject, a metarule will >>help but that's not what I'm going for. >> >>Any ideas here? I thank you again. >>Michael >> >> > >Why would you prefer to do it without META rules? I personally would use >META rules in a manner something like (completely untested, off the top of >my head): > >header __LOCAL_SUBJ_FOOEY Subject =~ /fooey/i >body __LOCAL_BODY_FOOEY /fooey/i > >meta LOCAL_MY_FOOEY (__LOCAL_BODY_FOOEY && !_LOCAL_SUB_FOOEY) >score LOCAL_MY_FOOEY 0.1 > >or something similar... been awhile since i wrote SA rules. > >hope this helps > >alan > >_______________________________________________ >Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca >MIMEDefang mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang > > _______________________________________________ Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca MIMEDefang mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
