On Tue, 6 Mar 2018, RW wrote:

On Tue, 6 Mar 2018 08:47:35 -0800 (PST)
John Hardin wrote:

On Tue, 6 Mar 2018, David Jones wrote:

In this case these were really bad spam so the APOSTROPHE_TOCC is
just riding on the back of other rules, BLs, and high Bayes

What I generally look at is the detailed rule performance in
masscheck. If it primarily hits on spams that score in total 1-3

Why not under 5?

If it's close to 5 and there's a limit that suggests the limit could be increased a bit.

It also needs to take into account the ham hits, which is why having a ham-starved corpus is such a problem.

Generally speaking there's a spike, if the spike is at less than 5 it needs attention and the lower the spike is the more generous the score limit may be, bearing in mind that poison pills should be rare.

 John Hardin KA7OHZ                    http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
 jhar...@impsec.org    FALaholic #11174     pgpk -a jhar...@impsec.org
 key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C  AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
  Failure to plan ahead on someone else's part does not constitute
  an emergency on my part.                 -- David W. Barts in a.s.r
 5 days until Daylight Saving Time begins in U.S. - Spring Forward

Reply via email to