From: Kyle Hasselbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Anyway, what caught my eye about your comment is that 3.0 is a high score.
If you were using spamassassin only, this would cause an unacceptable amount of false positives, but according to the statistics that come with spamassassin, 3.0 has the lowest combined rate of false positives/negatives. I've found that nearly all my legitimate mail comes in at less than 2.0 and it's rare for a spam to score lower than 3.0 especially since I have vipul's razor and bayesian filtering turned on.
I remember 5.0 being a low score.
It's pretty much the default "spam" level, anything higher is considered "spammy" in a regular installation.
I was thinking in my setup above, 15 would be the "too horrible to waste time challenging" score
Probably true, but I wanted to have a high reliability of not losing legitimate mail. I also use several RBLs so I don't get too many that score that high anyways.
and 1.0 would be the "so good I don't care if it's not white listed" score. Ultimately I'll probably take a big chunks of ham and spam and see how they fall in SA's scoring and decide from there.
I have some good mail that scores over a 1.0, especially from list traffic. This is probably getting off topic, please contact me off list if you want to discuss it further.
Chris Berry [EMAIL PROTECTED] Systems Administrator JM Associates
"Conciousness: that annoying time between naps."
_________________________________________________________________
Get MSN 8 and enjoy automatic e-mail virus protection. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
_____________________________________________ tmda-users mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users
