from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07CA443C32
	for <jm@localhost>; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 17:25:35 -0400 (EDT)
from phobos [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Tue, 20 Aug 2002 22:25:35 +0100 (IST)
from xent.com ([64.161.22.236]) by dogma.slashnull.org
    (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7KLOkZ25002 for <jm@jmason.org>;
    Tue, 20 Aug 2002 22:24:47 +0100
from lair.xent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xent.com (Postfix)
    with ESMTP id E757529415D; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 14:07:41 -0700 (PDT)
from mail3.panix.com (mail3.panix.com [166.84.1.74]) by xent.com
    (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7D99294099 for <fork@xent.com>; Tue,
    20 Aug 2002 08:43:50 -0700 (PDT)
from 159-98.nyc.dsl.access.net (159-98.nyc.dsl.access.net
    [166.84.159.98]) by mail3.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E9A598358 for
    <fork@xent.com>; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 11:45:25 -0400 (EDT)
From fork-admin@xent.com  Tue Aug 20 22:25:35 2002

I paid for CuteFTP on my Windows box.  Well worth the money despite there
being free alternatives, no regrets whatsoever.
Now that Mozilla isn't taking X down twice a day I'm unlikely to pay for
Opera, but if that hadn't happened around the same time I made the switch
to 100% unix I would have been happy to.
- Lucas
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

by example.com (Postfix, from userid 500)
	id 2B27716F18; Wed, 18 Sep 2002 12:36:24 +0100 (IST)
from example.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by jmason.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 28435F7B1; Wed, 18 Sep 2002 12:36:24 +0100 (IST)

"Fox" said:
> Before or after I whitelisted all the legit mailing lists that Razor is
> tagging?  I had one false positive in the last four days.  Razor tagged some
> guys person-to-person message because he used an ostrich-in-your-face jpeg
> that is probably pretty popular on the net, and -lm 4 means any single
> attachment in a message that is razored, razors the whole message, if I
> understand it correctly.
Razor folks: is -lm documented anywhere?   BTW, I notice all my *.conf
files in ~/.razor use "lm = 4" by default anyway.
> No, I am not keeping official tally of false positives.  I need to write a
> html interface to do it, and then it would be easy.  I imagine you want
> false positive rate per filter.  I will work on it tomorrow, and maybe in a
> week I will have some stats for false positives.
Yeah, that'd be cool -- much appreciated!   comparing text classifiers
like spam filters, without tracking FPs, is not good.   After all, "cat >
/dev/null" gets a 100% hit rate, but without the FP rate figure of, let's
say 90%, you'd never know it was a bad thing to do ;)
--j.