Jo Rhett wrote:
And frankly I disagree with the logic that rules that hit wrongly
shouldn't be fixed unless it raises the score about 5.0. I simply
couldn't function with *ANY* of my mailboxes at 5.0 -- I'd be deleting
1-2 pieces of spam per minute. I run my public mailboxes at 3.8 and I'm
trying to determine if 3.2 is reasonable.
Now, let me get this straight:
1. Jo Rhett claims he is running an "absolutely stock SA system with
absolution no customixzation".
2. He then claims "well, except for adding the (unspecified which) SARE
rules"
3. He then adds "oh yea, I take the default threshold down to 3.2 because
5 doesn't work for me".
4. He then COMPLAINS that rules are causing him FPs and demands that the
rules be changed.
5. He THEN claims I am lying and making false assertions when I state
that the rule in question (that I wrote) would NOT HIT on the headers as
posted, and as "proof" he repeats the same headers, which BY TRIVIAL
INSPECTION show the rule would not hit - so the headers have been modified
in the documentation provided.
Honey, if I ever cared about your problems, I sure as heck don't now.
Loren
