Re: [SAtalk] Bayes mis-learning problem

2004-01-20 Thread Justin Mason
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Arpi writes: >Hi, > >> On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 03:21:06PM -0500, Larry Gilson wrote: >> > http://useast.spamassassin.org/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html#learning%20op >> > tions >> > >> > bayes_ignore_header header_name >> >> ::bangs head on wall::

Re: [SAtalk] Bayes mis-learning problem

2004-01-20 Thread Arpi
Hi, > On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 03:21:06PM -0500, Larry Gilson wrote: > > http://useast.spamassassin.org/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html#learning%20op > > tions > > > > bayes_ignore_header header_name > > ::bangs head on wall:: How did I miss *that*? Thanks for correcting > my careless reading.

Re: [SAtalk] Bayes mis-learning problem

2004-01-20 Thread Ross Vandegrift
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 08:35:28PM -0800, Justin Mason wrote: > Actually, it works quite well. Some people get more spam than ham to > specific To addrs, so those become spam signs -- but once a ham arrives > at those addrs, the ham signs outweigh the To spam-sign and redeem > the mail. In theory

RE: [SAtalk] Bayes mis-learning problem

2004-01-19 Thread Larry Gilson
Thanks for clarifying Justin! --Larry > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 11:35 PM > To: Larry Gilson > Cc: 'Ross Vandegrift'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Bayes mis-learning problem > Larry Gi

Re: [SAtalk] Bayes mis-learning problem

2004-01-19 Thread Justin Mason
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Larry Gilson writes: > > In a broader sense though, shouldn't fields like To: be excluded by > > default? It seems like if I receive more than 50% spam, this is a > > receipe for disaster. Of course, some spam won't have a valid To: > > field, but i

RE: [SAtalk] Bayes mis-learning problem

2004-01-19 Thread Larry Gilson
> -Original Message- > From: Ross Vandegrift [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 4:07 PM > To: Larry Gilson > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Bayes mis-learning problem > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 03:21:06PM -0500, Larr

Re: [SAtalk] Bayes mis-learning problem

2004-01-19 Thread Ross Vandegrift
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 03:21:06PM -0500, Larry Gilson wrote: > http://useast.spamassassin.org/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html#learning%20op > tions > > bayes_ignore_header header_name ::bangs head on wall:: How did I miss *that*? Thanks for correcting my careless reading. In a broader sense

RE: [SAtalk] Bayes mis-learning problem

2004-01-19 Thread Larry Gilson
Look at: http://useast.spamassassin.org/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html#learning%20op tions bayes_ignore_header header_name If you receive mail filtered by upstream mail systems, like a spam-filtering ISP or mailing list, and that service adds new headers (as most of them do), these headers may