> I'm getting these messages and I'm not sure what they mean. Can anyone clear
> Sep 15 11:45:09 linux mailscanner[6128]: RBL Check ORDB-RBL timed out and
> was killed, consecutive failure 3 of 7
> Sep 15 11:45:24 linux mailscanner[6128]: SpamAssassin timed out and was
Your running mailscanner and the timeout used got to check ORDB-RBL is too
low and your timing out.  mailscanner will count up to seven timeouts and
then automatically disable these checks until it restarts itself (within 4
"The lyfe so short, the craft so long to learne"  Chaucer

from localhost (jalapeno [127.0.0.1])
	by jmason.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15C2C16F03
	for <jm@localhost>; Mon, 16 Sep 2002 00:10:47 +0100 (IST)
from jalapeno [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Mon, 16 Sep 2002 00:10:47 +0100 (IST)
from usw-sf-list2.sourceforge.net (usw-sf-fw2.sourceforge.net
    [216.136.171.252]) by dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id
    g8FKfDC27929 for <jm@jmason.org>; Sun, 15 Sep 2002 21:41:13 +0100
from usw-sf-list1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.13]
    helo=usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net) by usw-sf-list2.sourceforge.net with
    esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 17qgBZ-0006Tv-00; Sun,
    15 Sep 2002 13:40:05 -0700
from www.ctyme.com ([209.237.228.10] helo=darwin.ctyme.com) by
    usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Cipher TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168)
    (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 17qgBK-0003IH-00 for
    <spamassassin-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>; Sun, 15 Sep 2002 13:39:50
    -0700
from m206-56.dsl.tsoft.com ([198.144.206.56] helo=perkel.com) by
    darwin.ctyme.com with asmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 17qgB6-0002Od-00;
    Sun, 15 Sep 2002 13:39:36 -0700
No, hits=-5.7 required=7.0
	tests=AWL,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,KNOWN_MAILING_LIST,REFERENCES,
	      SPAM_PHRASE_01_02,USER_AGENT,USER_AGENT_MOZILLA_UA,
	      X_ACCEPT_LANG
	version=2.50-cvs
From spamassassin-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net  Mon Sep 16 00:10:47 2002

>On Sun, 15 Sep 2002 the voices made Marc Perkel write:
>>Right now we have one spam status flag indicating that a message is or
>>is not spam. The idea being that the end user perhaps make a rule that
>>would move the spam flagged messages into a spam folder and thus gain
>>some time by presorting messages into to piles.
> If you (people) don't know enough to filter on the actual score they've got
>the "stars", which will give them more than enough levers, if they want it.
Sure - we developers know that - but what I'm talking about is making it