Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-spamassassin-users-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-spamassassin-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3F6D667EE for ; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 14:29:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 79491 invoked by uid 500); 4 Jul 2011 14:29:14 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-spamassassin-users-archive@spamassassin.apache.org Received: (qmail 79412 invoked by uid 500); 4 Jul 2011 14:29:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@spamassassin.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list users@spamassassin.apache.org Received: (qmail 79405 invoked by uid 99); 4 Jul 2011 14:29:13 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 04 Jul 2011 14:29:13 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of lajo@kb.dk designates 130.226.229.20 as permitted sender) Received: from [130.226.229.20] (HELO post.kb.dk) (130.226.229.20) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 04 Jul 2011 14:29:04 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by post.kb.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72A034170CF for ; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 16:28:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from post.kb.dk ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (post.kb.dk [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id XzjAD2aN0tvb for ; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 16:28:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHANGE-01.kb.dk (exchange-01.kb.dk [130.226.220.130]) by post.kb.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63BEF4170BC for ; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 16:28:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHANGE-02.kb.dk ([fe80::d47b:397f:4d5b:33e4]) by EXCHANGE-01.kb.dk ([fe80::f4ed:9e9f:7925:a8e2%17]) with mapi id 14.01.0289.001; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 16:28:43 +0200 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Lars_J=F8rgensen?= To: "'users@spamassassin.apache.org'" Subject: Lowering spam threshold Thread-Topic: Lowering spam threshold Thread-Index: Acw6VqyVOWHnahv0Ty68MsTeL+xorg== Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2011 14:28:42 +0000 Message-ID: <6D2C830A0941EA40B6B483FE6EC98ADBC2B2E2@EXCHANGE-02.kb.dk> Accept-Language: da-DK, en-US Content-Language: da-DK X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.226.220.95] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_6D2C830A0941EA40B6B483FE6EC98ADBC2B2E2EXCHANGE02kbdk_" MIME-Version: 1.0 --_000_6D2C830A0941EA40B6B483FE6EC98ADBC2B2E2EXCHANGE02kbdk_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, We still get quite a bit of spam through and instead of fiddling with score= s, I was thinking about lowering the threshold. Currently tag is at 6.2 and= kill at 6.9. Would it be unwise to lower these? What thresholds are other = people on this list using? -- Lars --_000_6D2C830A0941EA40B6B483FE6EC98ADBC2B2E2EXCHANGE02kbdk_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

We still get quite a bit of spam through and instead= of fiddling with scores, I was thinking about lowering the threshold. Curr= ently tag is at 6.2 and kill at 6.9. Would it be unwise to lower these? Wha= t thresholds are other people on this list using?

Lars

--_000_6D2C830A0941EA40B6B483FE6EC98ADBC2B2E2EXCHANGE02kbdk_--