-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Daniel Quinlan writes: >RHSBL and overlap: > >17934 0.871 0.092 T_RCVD_IN_AHBL_RHSBL,__RCVD_IN_SBL_XBL >14374 0.698 0.090 T_RCVD_IN_AHBL_RHSBL,__RCVD_IN_SORBS >13134 0.638 0.074 T_RCVD_IN_AHBL_RHSBL,RCVD_IN_XBL >10697 0.520 0.071 T_RCVD_IN_AHBL_RHSBL,RCVD_IN_DSBL >10612 0.516 0.096 T_RCVD_IN_AHBL_RHSBL,RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET >7454 0.362 0.079 T_RCVD_IN_AHBL_RHSBL,RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL > >Lower overlap than the others, this might be worth keeping (and it's a >separate query anyway). I would say keep RHSBL, and leave the rest. In particular, the blocking of an entire Spanish ISP is a big "thumbs down" factor for me. I'm even a little lukewarm on RHSBL, too, just because it's another DNS query and 9.11% for a DNSBL is not exactly stellar. >Maybe we should let the perceptron take a whack at it. So, why aren't >we running the perceptron on nightly/weekly results? ;-) go for it! bugzilla.spamassassin.org is crying out for new uses for CPU time ;) - --j. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh CVS iD8DBQFAjYiQQTcbUG5Y7woRAnp2AKCPQs7v0QH4f1UrEqrkYgwmdhY56gCg3KKH wSFNLZGFrDxunqsuMhfHuD0= =xY3j -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
