-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Santerre writes:
>I've had conversations with legit mass emailers that have to fight getting
>there legit opt-in only email to customers, because of antispam software.
>I've been wanting to write a guide to legit emailers on how to make there
>e
rom: Covington, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 12:10 PM
> To: Larry Gilson; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [SAtalk] scoring system and values...
>
>
> Definitely FPs. I think SA has a very difficult time with solicited
> commercial email, e
than
they already do by adding the complexity of Bayes for a population that
size?
--Larry
> -Original Message-
> From: Covington, Chris
> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 12:10 PM
> To: Larry Gilson; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [SAtalk] scoring sy
YES_90 3.0
score BAYES_98 4.0
score BAYES_99 5.4
-
<>
| -Original Message-
| From: Covington, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 11:10 AM
| To: Larry Gilson; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject:
son
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 2:18 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] scoring system and values...
I don't know if this really fits in this subject or not. However, I
keep
thinking while reading this thread if anyone considers real opt-in
advertisements/messages that get tagged
Since we are a company, I don't get too hung up over these. I more worry
about newsletters people get for their work. I usually just delete the
"non-business" stuff, and don't run them as either spam or ham.
<>
| -Original Message-
| From: Larry Gilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Sent:
I don't know if this really fits in this subject or not. However, I keep
thinking while reading this thread if anyone considers real opt-in
advertisements/messages that get tagged by SA (like from OshKosh,
Travelocity, Lands' End, etc.) to be a FP or not. Do site-wide Bayes
installs have a hard t
| From: Terry Milnes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 7:08 AM
| To: David B Funk
| Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: Re: [SAtalk] scoring system and values...
|
| I have been considering using the bayes site wide, however I
| have seen a lot of opinions that oppose i
I have been considering using the bayes site wide, however I have seen a
lot of opinions that oppose its use this way. Furthermore I did/do have
doubts as to how well it would work.
There is no way that I can allow users to add their own mail to the
corpus, they'll screw it up.
I guess I could
On Sat, 8 Nov 2003, Terry Milnes wrote:
> The bayes filtering works great, but the typical user is not going to
> want to jump through what he would consider the huge obstacles to train
> a corpus. Furthermore implementing bayes on a system that incorporates
> thousands of users can be a daunting
dan
--
Dan Kohn <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://www.dankohn.com/>
-Original Message-
From: Terry Milnes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 08, 2003 05:47
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] scoring system and values...
>>Now I don't
Now I don't expect SA to know dutch; that would be unfair. But what I
would
like is some way to score those english terms way higher than an american
would or could. For an american, mortgage does not spell spam per se. But
for ME it does, and I can practically guarantee I will not ever get an
em
Okay, THIS is a little silly for sourceforge, at least for the SA list:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: host
mail.sourceforge.net[66.35.250.206] said: 550-This message matches a
blacklisted regular expression ([Vv] *[Ii] *[Aa] 550 *[Gg] *[Rr] *[Aa])
(in
reply to end of DATA command)
(now re-edi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello maarten,
Friday, November 7, 2003, 3:09:20 PM, you wrote:
mvdB> Following up to myself, since I want to clarify something here...
mvdB> Another aspect that is relevant to me (but arguably not to most
mvdB> users of SA and I'm aware of that...)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello maarten,
Friday, November 7, 2003, 1:25:05 PM, you wrote:
mvdB> ... Upon looking at those rules I see al LOT of inconsistencies.
mvdB> For instance, I found these rules that have score of zero(!) (and
mvdB> these are merely the top of a large i
Maarten J H van den Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> List 1:
> score ALL_CAP_PORN 0.650 0.669 0 0
> score PENIS_ENLARGE2 0.500 0.590 0 0.501
> score UPPERCASE_50_75 0.794 1.137 0 0
> score V+AG+A_ONLINE 1.100 1.101 3.151 4.056
>
> If it were up to me, I'd say that giving only half a point to a m
maarten van den Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is not a single rule that scores
> higher than 4.999. That is plain wrong in my book; let's say we encounter the
> word "vicodin" (which is totally absent in the current rules by the way!).
> I would then say "let's score that 5.50 immedia
At 04:25 PM 11/7/2003, maarten van den Berg wrote:
Upon looking at those rules I see al LOT of
inconsistencies. For instance, I found these rules that have score of zero(!)
(and these are merely the top of a large iceberg)
score CASHCASHCASH 0
score ADDRESSES_ON_CD 0
score BLANK_LINES_90_100 0
scor
maarten van den Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I know you can teach SA to recognize spam in ones' own
> language, but what is missing right now is a simple way to make
> SA much more immune to the abundant english spam, which arguably
> is by FAR the bulk of all spam...
There is a way: the Ba
maarten van den Berg said:
>
> Following up to myself, since I want to clarify something here...
>
> Another aspect that is relevant to me (but arguably not to most users of
> SA
> and I'm aware of that...) is that for me, english is not my native
> language,
> neither am I a resident of an english
Following up to myself, since I want to clarify something here...
Another aspect that is relevant to me (but arguably not to most users of SA
and I'm aware of that...) is that for me, english is not my native language,
neither am I a resident of an english-speaking country. And because of this,
7.0 in your own config files.
-tom
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of maarten van den Berg
> Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 3:25 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] scoring system and values...
>
> But
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Thielen writes:
>I'm not criticizing your viewpoint, but with a little tweaking, SA really
>"works for me"!
Yeah -- and that's the important thing. It's really very easy to train
the Bayes stuff, in particular.
The aim is to:
- work well f
Hiya Maarten!
This is going a bit off topic, but the spam I receive is 90% porn. I
haven't had one slip through in months. The secret? Adding bayesian and
network checks into the mix. Given, I'm the only user on my system as
well as the admin, but I've seen 100% accuracy for quite some time no
On Friday 07 November 2003 18:43, Matt Kettler wrote:
> At 10:29 AM 11/7/2003, Maarten J H van den Berg wrote:
> >Sorry if this has been discussed in the past...
>
> It's been discussed many times.. It's very common for people to have a very
> deep misunderstanding of how SA scoring works. Most peo
Wow! Matt this is an incredibly informative post. Thank you!
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 12:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] scoring system and values...
At 10:29 AM 11/7/2003
At 10:29 AM 11/7/2003, Maarten J H van den Berg wrote:
Sorry if this has been discussed in the past...
It's been discussed many times.. It's very common for people to have a very
deep misunderstanding of how SA scoring works. Most people fall into the
trap of over-simplifying the problem, and si
Sorry if this has been discussed in the past...
I'd like to bring up the subject of the scoring of different rules which
have, IMHO, a very high likelyhood of being spam but are scored rather
low. And I noticed a somewhat related fact, that there is no one rule
that in itself decides somethin
28 matches
Mail list logo
