Thanks Bob,
I think this will help. Found a few more rules sets I did not have in my tool box.
Thanks
SCott
At 12:23 PM 3/30/2004, Bob George wrote:
Scott Williams , Area4 wrote:
Does anyone have a filter that would catch this one below? Unfortunately, my filter even learned it a ham ! UGh!
With my existing rules, it scored a 2.1. Not flagged, but at least not auto-trained:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_90 autolearn=no version=2.6
Looks like my previous bayes training got close, but not quite.
After training SA bayes on that specific message:
X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=5.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_99 autolearn=no version=2.63
Better, but 1st one slips through until trained.
After adding: http://www.rulesemporium.com/rules/99_sare_adult.cf
X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=8.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_99,SARE_ADULT2,SARE_BETTERORG autolearn=no version=2.63
I've been avoiding those content-specific rules, but it looks like they may be called for to help nudge bayes along, at least initially.
- Bob
Scott Williams, CCNA
Ph: 217-893-1431 Em: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website: www.area4.k12.il.us
Area 4 Technology Center 200 S. Fredrick, Suite 305 Rantoul, IL 61866
