https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7953

Cian <[email protected]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|INVALID                     |---
                 CC|                            |[email protected]
                   |                            |om
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED

--- Comment #2 from Cian <[email protected]> ---
>Citing mail-tester.com in a bug report here REDUCES your credibility. That 
>site is NOT an accurate representation of SpamAssassin scoring in the wild

Ok, I accept that.  As someone who isn't hosting his own mail server, and
therefore isn't personally running SA, it was a convenient place for me to go. 
Is there a better site that I can use to test so I don't have to install and
configure SA locally?

>SA is *designed* *intentionally* to have rules whose scores are well below the 
>spam threshold (5 by default) match on non-spam messages

I thought about mentioning the spam threshold in my first message, since I was
aware of it, but I ended up leaving it out.  I understand that 5 is the default
threshold and I am (according to mail-tester, which I recognize now is flawed)
below it, but my mail is confirmed to be going to junk.  Is it possible that
sys-admins at several large organizations are using SA with a stricter
threshold?  I understand that their choice to use SA in a non-recommended way
isn't your fault, but it raises the stakes on broad rules and makes false
positives more likely.

>See https://ruleqa.spamassassin.org for the details of how our rules score 
>against the manually classified corpora of ham and spam provided by some of 
>our users. This is an open system and we are always eager to add new 
>dependable sources to those corpora to get a wider sample. You can see in that 
>system that the rules you see as problematic match messages that are 97-100% 
>spam

Thank you for sharing that tool with me, I was not aware of it.  Am I
understanding correctly that the QA for PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD is based on 17
corpuses?  And that those corpora come from the submissions of just 9 testers? 
Is it possible that there are industries not represented in that QA?  If none
of those 9 testers happens to work within the space technology sector, it seems
natural that they would not receive much Ham from .space domains, even though
there is a whole industry where it would be expected to receive mail from those
domains.

I'm not writing this to hassle you, Bill, I'm here because my whole business
depends on it. I have done what research I could, followed the directions from
NameCheap and Zoho when setting up my domain and email, I set up DKIM and DMARC
and SPF, I have looked through the SpamAssassin wiki.  I could take the advice
from the SA wiki and get a deliverability consultant, but besides the fact that
I can't afford it, it seems absurd to pay hundreds of dollars to be able to
send a few handcrafted emails a day to individual recipients.  I could write to
the sys-admin of each and every organization I want to contact and ask to be
whitelisted, but I suspect I know how that will go.

If you have any idea what else I can do, any other lead I can follow, I'll go
after it and be out of your hair, but I'm here because the only *hint* of a
reason that might explain why my emails aren't going through is points deducted
on SA for having a domain that ends in ".space"

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

Reply via email to