Do not scan outgoing messages for spam

[Hugo van der Kooij]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Devin Henderson wrote:
| To everyone:
|
| Thanks for your ideas and information on this. A couple things I
| wanted to mention:
|
| There really is no "spaminess" to the outgoing mail that is being
| marked as spam. We are a large irrigation equipment distributor and
| engineering firm and unless words like sprinkler, valve, pipe and
| quote are considered spammy there is no "spaminess" here (unless one
| of my users has selected tons of legitimate irrigation emails and
| marked them as Spam through sa-learn). I suspect one of the reasons
| this is happening is because I have my spam score variables very low
| because of the inability in the past of my spam filter to successfully
| catch all of the spam we get (we've got a one dictionary word domain,
| maybe that is one cause for so much spam). Currently my Required
| SpamAssassin Score is 2 and my High SpamAssasin Score is 5. Since
| adding spamhaus blacklists to my config this has improved and I think
| it may be time to raise the spam score levels up to a more standard
| level but I'm still receiving some mail that to *me* appears to be
| very obvious spam but either receives a score of 1 or has no score and
| is simply marked 'Found to be clean' and X-Spam-Status: No.

The obvious answer is that you have not trained your bayesian database
for your network. That is something you MUST do if you want to detect
spam correctly.

Hugo.

- --
hvdkooij at vanderkooij.org               http://hugo.vanderkooij.org/
PGP/GPG? Use: http://hugo.vanderkooij.org/0x58F19981.asc

	A: Yes.
	>Q: Are you sure?
	>>A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
	>>>Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?

Bored? Click on http://spamornot.org/ and rate those images.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFIOSuBBvzDRVjxmYERAjPiAKCF2PiD6u19JTBnCWARZjsF6LvN0QCgqTgQ
+DRL8PgRpXnPmvAkmZ+tXsA=
=e2oV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----