BAYES_40=-1.096
HTML_90_100=0.022
HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.018
HTML_MESSAGE=0.001
MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.177
RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.216
RCVD_IN_SBL=0.107
URIBL_SBL=0.996
URIBL_WS_SURBL
=1.462
OPTO_HEADER=?
SARE_MSGID_EMPTY=?
not finding two of these tests on my
system or in the list at the site, i'm getting 2.9 from adding up the
others. At least one of those two other tests seems to have brought
the score down.
simply because a message has a
lot of test hits doesn't mean much. many tests bring the score down.
bayes here, for example, knocked the score down by 1.096. bayes can really
screw things up if it's not properly trained. It doesn't even ADD to the
score unless it has at least 50% probability.
-----Original
Message-----
From: Robert Leonard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 10:31 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: How did this not get tagged??
From: Robert Leonard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 10:31 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: How did this not get tagged??
I got the following in my headers.. I'm not sure how this could possibly score so low, with all the hits it received...
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=6.0 tests=BAYES_40,HTML_90_100,
HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02,HTML_MESSAGE,MIME_HTML_ONLY,OPTO_HEADER,
RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET,RCVD_IN_SBL,SARE_MSGID_EMPTY,URIBL_SBL,
URIBL_WS_SURBL version=3.0.0
X-Spam-Bayes: 0.3934
X-Spam-Pyzor: Reported 0 times.
