On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 11:23, Gwendolynn ferch Elydyr wrote: > > > > http://www.spamassassin.org/tests.html > > I'm familiar with the scoring - and in both cases, bayes and network > scoring are enabled. Unfortunately the difference in scores is quite > inconsistant, and doesn't seem to reflect that type of difference. > > > > Is anybody running with a spam threshold hovering around 1 or 2 ? > > > > Nope, or at least they shouldn't be. The hueristic tests were run on the > > basis that 5 was the spam/ham threshold. If you want to raise the scores > > to tag more spam, add more tests like network tests and bayes. > > I have network tests and bayes enabled [and just went through the > process of rebuilding my bayes database, just to make sure that there > wasn't something odd in there]. The scores are still very, very low.
Try turning off the bayes AND also turn off the line that removes scores if they are too low. Check to see if something else is putting in points. -- Stephen John Smoogen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Los Alamos National Lab CCN-5 Sched 5/40 PH: 4-0645 Ta-03 SM-1498 MailStop B255 DP 10S Los Alamos, NM 87545 -- So shines a good deed in a weary world. = Willy Wonka -- _______________________________________________ Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca MIMEDefang mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
