Watermarking action problem?

[Mark Nienberg]

John Wilcock wrote:
> John Wilcock a écrit :
>> Just received a genuine out-of-office reply that was sent with a null 
>> sender, but didn't quote the original message and hence the watermark.
>>
>> MS correctly added 5 points to the spam score, but this should not 
>> have been enough for the message to be considered as spam. (-1.5 + 5 
>> = +3.5, with a threshold of 5) However, it still took the spam action 
>> rather than the nonspam action for the message.
>
> Conversely, I just received a piece of spam with a null sender and (of 
> course) no watermark. MS again correctly added points to the spam 
> score. This time they should have been enough to push the message over 
> the high spam threshold, but MS still took the ordinary spam action, 
> not the high spam action.
>
In my case, legitimate bounce messages quoting the original message 
containing my server's watermark are tagged as having bad watermarks.  
Have you seen that happen?

Mark