On Mon, 17 Jun 2013, Amir 'CG' Caspi wrote:
At 10:48 AM -0700 06/17/2013, John Hardin wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jun 2013, Amir 'CG' Caspi wrote:
> I am now seeing STYLE_GIBBERISH hitting on a lot of spam in the past day
> or so, since the new rules hit the distribution. So far, all TPs, no
> FPs.
Yay!
But, I found one today that should have hit (at least on cursory inspection)
and did not. See http://pastebin.com/Zswg77Ds
There is definitely style gibberish there, but it didn't hit that rule.
(Yes, it also hit bayes00, I know... don't bring that up. =P)
Any idea why it failed to hit, and does this need another rule revision?
Yep, and yep. Revision committed. Initial comment gibberish rule
committed.
--
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the rock of doom requires a gentle nudge away from Gaia to
prevent a very bad day for Earthlings, NASA won’t be riding to the
rescue. These days, NASA does dodgy weather research and outreach
programs, not stuff in actual space with rockets piloted by
flinty-eyed men called Buzz. -- Daily Bayonet
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Today: SWMBO's Birthday
