I don't, but I guess other's get the false positives all the time - so the levels thing kinda stems from requests I have seen and stuff I've toyed with occasionally.
Of course we all have our personal sorting methods for getting the critical emails answered first. I've seen some thick-client users who want their junk folder ranked, but if the thick-client itself doesn't have a x-spam-score sort method, they want to avoid having to set up filters for x-spam-level stars or something.
These people want a fast low-hi kinda thing that will persist across whatever client they may be in; and so they can tell at a glance on looking through a junk/spam folder. So you would have:
Low junk/spam folder
High junk/spam folder + label
At the same time it boggles my mind how they just don't want the score prepend/append to the subject if it's spam. 
On the web-client side it would be relaly nice to expose the x-spam-score as a sortable column in junk.
Extrapolating that a bit - zimbra is all about reducing time needed right? In the junk/spam folder, rather than manually running a search by date then score; have it auto arrange into days with the lowest scores first/at the top.
I think days would be a short enough span to work in, because there's always the "hey did you get this?" "Don't see it in my inbox let me check my junk." Thus it will probably near the top as far as scores go, & you won't have to revert to sort by timeline.
This would help a lot in picking your values:
Bug 19152 - RFE: Spam statistics Quote:
It would be helpful when adjusting spam tag and kill levels to have statistics.
I'd like to see some kind of distribution of scores for all messages, not just
spam.
In addition statistics about the scores of messages being classified as
"Junk" or "Not Junk" by users.With this information, admins can adjust tag and kill levels accordingly. If one sees a high number of "Not Junk" submissions where the spam score is close to the tag level, it might be appropriate to adjust the tag level.
|
Re-sending large emails sucks for the concept of graylisting. Things like that always make me wish for more configurable options, but that means someone's gotta code the features into them in the first place...