Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list gopher); Wed, 16 Nov 2005 21:49:33 -0600 (CST) Received: from mo-69-69-114-6.sta.sprint-hsd.net ([69.69.114.6] helo=erwin.lan.complete.org) by glockenspiel.complete.org with esmtps (with TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (TLS peer CN erwin.complete.org, certificate verified) (Exim 4.50) id 1EcaUt-000061-Ox; Wed, 16 Nov 2005 21:31:55 -0600 Received: from heinrich.lan.complete.org ([10.200.0.15] helo=heinrich.complete.org) by erwin.lan.complete.org with esmtps (with TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (TLS peer CN christoph.complete.org, certificate verified) (Exim 4.50) id 1EcaUX-0003WZ-8X; Wed, 16 Nov 2005 21:31:17 -0600 Received: from jgoerzen by heinrich.complete.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1EcWOm-0005aw-Ax; Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:09:04 -0600 Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:09:04 -0600 From: John Goerzen To: gopher@complete.org Subject: [gopher] Re: ???????? Message-ID: <20051116230904.GL21186@complete.org> References: <20051113235514.GA24410@SDF.LONESTAR.ORG> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051113235514.GA24410@SDF.LONESTAR.ORG> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Spam-Status: No (score 0.1): AWL=-0.000, FORGED_RCVD_HELO=0.05 X-Virus-Scanned: by Exiscan on glockenspiel.complete.org at Wed, 16 Nov 2005 21:31:55 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-archive-position: 1155 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: gopher-bounce@complete.org Errors-to: gopher-bounce@complete.org X-original-sender: jgoerzen@complete.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: gopher@complete.org List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: Gopher X-List-ID: Gopher List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: X-list: gopher On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 05:55:14PM -0600, Benn Newman wrote: > spam-Status: Yes (score 6.0): AWL=-1.926, FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK=3.037, FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS=0.516, FROM_HAS_ULINE_NUMS=0.361, MSGID_FROM_MTA_ID=1.704, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=1.485, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.15, > +URIBL_SBL=0.629 > > What's the point of the spam 'detector' if you don't use it? (Though I suppose the cut > off is above 6.0.) :-p The cut-off to actually send a message to the far reaches of /dev/null is a bit higher than the cut-off to set the spam status in the header to Yes. Occasionally a few legit mails sneak by at this lowe level. (I think the cutoff for deletion is 6.5) -- John