Am 02.10.2015 um 19:15 schrieb Andrew Davidson:
I'm not an expert on the mechanics of Bayes so I'm wondering how valuable it is
to continue training with collected spam that is properly tagged with BAYES_999.
Does that help to reinforce the logic or is it overly focusing the database on
emai
On 02.10.15 13:15, Andrew Davidson wrote:
I'm not an expert on the mechanics of Bayes so I'm wondering how
valuable it is to continue training with collected spam that is
properly tagged with BAYES_999.
Does that help to reinforce the logic or is it overly focusing the
database on emails it can
I'm not an expert on the mechanics of Bayes so I'm wondering how
valuable it is to continue training with collected spam that is
properly tagged with BAYES_999.
Does that help to reinforce the logic or is it overly focusing the
database on emails it can already detect? Should I only be training it
On Fri, 2015-07-03 at 19:17 +0200, Antony Stone wrote:
> On Friday 03 July 2015 at 19:02:27 (EU time), ClaudeWSmith wrote:
>
> > I am an OLD time user of SPAMPal.
> >
> > But, SPAMPal does not work in my new 64 Bit machine.
> >
> > I have Windows 7, and Thunderbird.
> >
> > What version of SPAM
On Thu, 1 Oct 2015 18:53:16 -0700
Larry Goldman wrote:
> From http://spamassassin.apache.org:
>
> > Latest News
> >
> > 2015-04-30: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 has been released! Highlights
> > include:
> >
> > improved automation to help combat spammers that are abusing new
> > top level domains;
> >
