Re: RFS: dnscruft
"Adam Borowski" <email@example.com> wrote in message
Also, the word "dnscruft" has a spam ratio of no more than 50% (due to the
recent ITP), thus it doesn't contribute towards a given post's SA score.
On the other hand, though:
Ok, then why did you not actually use the name dnscuft in your post? (The
first post that made it past s.a.)
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on barad-dur
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD2,
GAPPY_SUBJECT,PRIORITY_NO_NAME autolearn=no version=3.0.3
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 (built Thu, 03 Mar 2005 10:44:12 +0100)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on barad-dur.angband.pl)
You managed to score quite a bit just for using Lookout, more than half of
what I got for plenty of quotes from the crap sites dnscruft blocks. But
oh well, the original RFS was sent by pine, and it's non-free junk too.
Hmm... I acess the list via Gmane, but my copy of the message had this
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=4.0 tests=AWL,FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD2,
Anyway GAPPY_SUBJECT is your fault, FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD2 is somewhat
misleading as I posted via gmane.
PRIORITY_NO_NAME is horribly incorrect. The message priority was '3' which
is 'normal'. That is the default priority, so it should not matter if a user
agent indicator is present. And a UA indicator was present. Obviously that
rule is simply broken.
But oh well, I need a way to somehow trick you to dget
and review/upload it :p
That one I cannot do. If you could not guess based on the headers, IANADD.