Mailing List Archive

Bad Bayes! No Cookie!
Wah! BAYES_00 on Mr Wiggly?? That's not right!

X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_50_60,
HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_02,HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_TAG_BALANCE_BODY,MRWIGGLY,
SUBJ_BUY autolearn=no version=2.63

Do y'all leave the default score for BAYES_00? Or do you have it scored up
higher so it doesn't shoot you in the foot like this? Any suggestions on
what to score it up to in order to avoid this?

Thx.

--JR
Re: Bad Bayes! No Cookie! [ In reply to ]
Does this look better?

0.1 HTML_60_70 BODY: Message is 60% to 70% HTML
0.1 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
5.4 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100%
[score: 0.9901]
1.2 HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_02 BODY: HTML: images with 0-200 bytes of words
2.0 MRWIGGLY Mr. Wiggly enhance drug spam.

I'm surprised at that html-tag-balance line. MrWiggly usually doesn't screw
up his html. Maybe the message got corrupted?

Loren

----- Original Message -----
From: "JR" <alerts@nu-designs.com>
To: <spamassassin-users@incubator.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 10:02 AM
Subject: Bad Bayes! No Cookie!


>
> Wah! BAYES_00 on Mr Wiggly?? That's not right!
>
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_50_60,
> HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_02,HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_TAG_BALANCE_BODY,MRWIGGLY,
> SUBJ_BUY autolearn=no version=2.63
>
> Do y'all leave the default score for BAYES_00? Or do you have it scored up
> higher so it doesn't shoot you in the foot like this? Any suggestions on
> what to score it up to in order to avoid this?
>
> Thx.
>
> --JR
>
>
>