BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?

2005-01-06 Thread Dierk Haasis
Hello TBBETA Members! Yesterday I installed Achim's bug-fixed BF 2.0.1. Before that I very, very rarely had a false positive (by 2.0 and predecessors), all in all I can only remember four instances and they were easily explainable. This morning I polled my mail and four out of six

Re: Antispam Bayes Filter Plugin 2.0.1 (Open Source)

2005-01-06 Thread Foster, Graham
Hello Francis FG a) The version number still reads 2.0.0? On mine, the version number is 2.0.1 after automatuc update (The Bat! must be closed) I can't use the automatic update function as I'm behind a firewall, and the plugin upgrade program cannot handle that. I re-downloaded and re-installed

Re: BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?

2005-01-06 Thread Tim Casten
Hello Dierk, Thursday, January 6, 2005, 3:17:45 AM, you wrote: Yesterday I installed Achim's bug-fixed BF 2.0.1. Before that I very, very rarely had a false positive (by 2.0 and predecessors), all in all I can only remember four instances and they were easily explainable. This

Re: BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?

2005-01-06 Thread Peter Fjelsten
Dierk, On 06-01-2005 09:17, you [DH] wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: DH Yesterday I installed Achim's bug-fixed BF 2.0.1. Before that I DH very, very rarely had a false positive (by 2.0 and predecessors), DH all in all I can only remember four instances and they were easily DH

Re: BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?

2005-01-06 Thread Hendrik Oesterlin
Dierk Haasis wrotes on 06/01/2005 at 19:17:45 +1100 subject BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive? : This morning I polled my mail and four out of six messages from this list were suddenly deemed Junk. I didn't change any of my settings. Anybody seen something similar? no false

Re: BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?

2005-01-06 Thread Dierk Haasis
Hello Hendrik! On Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 1:59:10 PM you wrote: no false positives here. Please look in the Bayesfilter-logfile if it was the Bayesian or the Regex method that caused your false positives! I went through the log with a machete to extract the significant entries; here are

Re: BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?

2005-01-06 Thread Peter Fjelsten
Dierk, On 06-01-2005 14:26, you [DH] wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Ursache: gespeicherte DNS-Anfrage DNSBL. Ursache: dnsbl.sorbs.net list.dsbl.org And again. Ursache: gespeicherte DNS-Anfrage And again. So it is due to the fact that DNSBL finally works. DH Curiously my own message was

Re: BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?

2005-01-06 Thread Dierk Haasis
Hello Peter! On Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 2:36:58 PM you wrote: I does not look like you are on lists (to any greater extent). Hm, as far as I can interpret the results, I'd say it was pure coincidence that my own message got filtered/blacklisted. Shouldn't be; I just notched up the number

Re: Common vs account filters

2005-01-06 Thread Thomas Fernandez
Hello George, On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 19:23:03 -0800 GMT (06/01/2005, 10:23 +0700 GMT), George Mitchell wrote: GM As I understand the problem, you have a lot of complicated common GM filters. Since the common filters are evaluated before account GM filters, you have to specify continue processing

Re: Common vs account filters

2005-01-06 Thread MAU
Hello Thomas, M No, please. The problem is that Common filters are still buggy. Otherwise M you could easily do what you wish. How can I do what I want to do with subfilters in common filters? George Mitchel has explained it perfectly and, as I can see, you have seen our point. -- Best

Re: BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?

2005-01-06 Thread Achim Winkler
hello, please check the logfile which filter catched the false sorted mails. if it was the dns blacklist filter, try to increase the default value for dns filtering. if it was the regular expression filter try to increase the threshold value. alternative you can disable one of them or both!!!

Re: BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?

2005-01-06 Thread Dierk Haasis
Hello Achim! On Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 8:02:33 PM you wrote: please check the logfile which filter catched the false sorted mails. if it was the dns blacklist filter, try to increase the default value for dns filtering. At least the messages I found the lines in the log for showed DNS

Re: BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?

2005-01-06 Thread Sean Rima
Hello Dierk, Thursday, January 6, 2005, 8:17:45 AM, you wrote: Hello TBBETA Members! Yesterday I installed Achim's bug-fixed BF 2.0.1. Before that I very, very rarely had a false positive (by 2.0 and predecessors), all in all I can only remember four instances and they were easily

Re[2]: Antispam Bayes Filter Plugin 2.0.1 (Open Source)

2005-01-06 Thread Sean Rima
Hello Dierk, Wednesday, January 5, 2005, 9:59:27 PM, you wrote: Hello Sean! On Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 10:45:08 PM you wrote: I dunno if you noticed but I cannot seem to get the macros to work :( Do you mean the Update program? I couldn't make it work correctly at first - until I

Re: BayesFilter 201: Much more aggressive?

2005-01-06 Thread Krzysztof KudĀ³acik
2005-01-06|09:17 you wrote: This morning I polled my mail and four out of six messages from this list were suddenly deemed Junk. I didn't change any of my settings. Anybody seen something similar? Not here - on contrary: my plug-in seems to be overtained: ver 2.0 and 2.0.1 seems to be more