Re: Request to change rule RCVD_IN_RP_CERTIFIED

From: Kevin A. McGrail <KMcGrail_at_nospam>
Date: Fri Mar 30 2012 - 16:29:16 GMT
To: Bowie Bailey <Bowie_Bailey@BUC.com>

On 3/30/2012 12:08 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
>
> I checked my logs for the last 30 days. RCVD_IN_RP_CERTIFIED hit 505
> times, but did not hit a single spam message. There is also not a
> single case where it would have changed the ham/spam designation of the
> message if it had not hit.
In other words, a 100% perfect S/O.

For those with issues, I recommend you score it as 0 but otherwise I
need science that debates the rule. Not single jurisdiction legality
debates or broad discussion of how social media works

regards,
KAM

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Robert Schetterer: "Re: Spam from Moniker Privacy Services."
Previous message: Bowie Bailey: "Re: Request to change rule RCVD_IN_RP_CERTIFIED"
In reply to: Bowie Bailey: "Re: Request to change rule RCVD_IN_RP_CERTIFIED"
Next in thread: Michael Scheidell: "Re: Request to change rule RCVD_IN_RP_CERTIFIED"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ By Date ] [ By Thread ] [ By Subject ] [ By Author ]