On 2/4/2005 10:41 AM, ned(_dot_)freed(_at_)mrochek(_dot_)com sent forth
electrons to convey:
>>>>FYI the draft for the new version of the spamtest extension is now
>>>>available. The only change between this and the current RFC is the addition
>>>>of a :percent argument to the spamtest test to allow for a numeric range of
>>>>0 - 100. The value -1 is used to indicate a message that was not
>>>>categorised in anyway.
>>I'm surprised we need a percentage spam score... I would have thought 10
>>levels was enough. Indeed in your example you use level 30(%) = 3.
>FWIW, I personally don't see any need for more levels, but I have seen
>some user requests for this and I understand others have seen considerable
>demand for it.
Any of it compelling?
The one I find somewhat compelling is the desire to convert to existing uses
and cutoff values for SpamAssassin to sieve and spamtest. SpamAssassin uses
real numbered scores and the obvious mapping to a 1-10 scale is a bit too
grainy. A 1-100 scale, OTOH, is more than sufficient.
Sometimes, there's considerable demand for bad
ideas (e.g. to accept spam from open relays, e.g. from an EFF founder -
http://www.toad.com/gnu/). I thought we discussed this and decided 10
was enough levels, but I find no mention of it in the archives.
This is a long way from being a bad idea.