On January 16, 2004 12:55 pm, Rich Puhek wrote:
> I use a slightly different approach.
>
> I filter my emails into 4 different IMAP folders: slightly-spammy,
> somewhat-spammy, pretty-spammy, and very spammy. The filtering is based
> on increasing number of SA hits (actually the X-Spam-Level: heade
Gary Funck wrote:
It is a pain, esp. on a big mailbox, and you need large sample, of say,
2000/so each of ham and spam to train the Bayes engine.
What I did is fired up 'mutt', and used its 'tag' capabilities to
tag the spam that I wanted to extract and deposit into my spam sample. It is
impor
> From: cube
> Sent: Friday, January 16, 2004 8:52 AM
>
> Does anyone have a good way of collecting ham for the bayesian
> filters. I
> can collect spam quite easily, but mixed in with my ham is all
> kinds of spam.
> (There is a buttload of spam with less hits than 1.)
>
> I read everywhere t
Does anyone have a good way of collecting ham for the bayesian filters. I
can collect spam quite easily, but mixed in with my ham is all kinds of spam.
(There is a buttload of spam with less hits than 1.)
I read everywhere that I should do this process manually to ensure the
quality of ham; th
