> I think I've worked on SA enough to understand that I can localize a
> score.  I'm just not comfortable with using SpamAssassin as a vehicle
> for drumming up your business at the expense of our user base.This is exactly what I think. SpamAssassin has always been conservative
about adding unproven RBLs and such, and this should be the same.> I think it would make more sense to start Habeas with a less aggressive
> score (one which will not give spammers a quick path into everyone's
> inbox) and after we've seen evidence that the system works, then we can
> increase the magnitude of the score.I say start it with a zero score and put it in 70_cvs_rules_under_test like
any other unproven rule. Then score it based on actual results, not
promises. My corpus does not yet contain a single non-spam (or spam) message
with a Habeas mark. Based on that, it doesn't impress me and it wouldn't
impress the GA either. Rules with exactly the same statistics are being
dropped from SA right now, and I don't see why this should be any different.--
Michael Moncur  mgm at starlingtech.com  http://www.starlingtech.com/
"Furious activity is no substitute for understanding." --H. H. Williams-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
Spamassassin-talk@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk