Per Björklund wrote:
Well, for example, I tried the attached porn spam (which uses a lot of 0's and 1's)
with 2.60-CVS,
but it still didn't score more than 0.6.
(I don't have razor, pyzor, bayes etc. on the machine I tried 2.60-CVS on so perhaps
that would have increased the score.)
This is what
I belive this is work for bayes. I just wondering why people turn it off ?
Why they try to use 'manual' bayes filtering ?
> > Wouldn't it be possible to expand all tests so that they can match all
> > those p0rn, rem0ve and g1rls and so on
>
> Perhaps uri references to real live p0rn sites, so tha
