Hi, > For example, 212.227.126.135, scores 4 out of a 100 on senderscore. It > also currently hits just sorbs. The individual score for each would > have to be so low, even with such a poor reputation, that it hardly > makes it worthwhile. I can't reject just on the almost worst > reputation as you can have or just on sorbs, and the combination of > the two isn't significant enough either.
I also meant to point out that with a reputation like 4 out of a 100, you'd think it would be listed on more RBLs than just sorbs. Something is wrong there. A mail server doesn't receive an absolutely horrible reputation without being blacklisted elsewhere. Senderscore is not trustworthy.
