On Wed, 15 Oct 2008, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 14.10.08 12:17, John Hardin wrote:
You're using BAYES_99 as a poison pill rule, right?
Well, no - that wsas just an example. However I met this one most often.
Ah. Okay, I misinterpreted your initial post, then.
If you're not willing
to add enough fractional points to BAYES_99 to overcome SPF_PASS and other
similar rules, then why not do this:
meta CANCEL_SPF_PASS SPF_PASS
score CANCEL_SPF_PASS 0.001
I thought of that, but I'd like to have score negate SPF_PASS even if
that one changes...
Given that SPF_PASS is only intended to detect a characteristic and not
alter the score (well, not materially) I doubt its score will change.
--
John Hardin KA7OHZ http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] FALaholic #11174 pgpk -a [EMAIL PROTECTED]
key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are now seeing the disastrous consequences of government
dictating behavior to the mortgage lending industry over the past
two decades. Why do some think government dictating behavior to
the health care industry would be any less disastrous?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
20 days until the Presidential Election
