Logan Shaw wrote:
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, jdow wrote:
From: "Joe Zitnik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Our scanning program has the ability to archive all e-mail, both
inbound
and outbound, which we have been doing for months now. Given that your
outbound mail is almost certainly ham, the majority of it
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, jdow wrote:
From: "Joe Zitnik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Our scanning program has the ability to archive all e-mail, both inbound
and outbound, which we have been doing for months now. Given that your
outbound mail is almost certainly ham, the majority of it's content is
going
Well, that was part of my reason for doing it. My bayes is seriously
skewed for the spam side, something like 4 to 1. The problem is I'm
getting about 90% spam coming in, so it's difficult enough finding
legitimate mail to feed it. I wasn't talking about feeding strictly
outbounds, but using the
| From: Joe Zitnik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| Our scanning program has the ability to archive all e-mail,
| both inbound
| and outbound, which we have been doing for months now. Given
| that your
| outbound mail is almost certainly ham, the majority of it's content is
| going to be specific t
From: "Joe Zitnik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Our scanning program has the ability to archive all e-mail, both inbound
and outbound, which we have been doing for months now. Given that your
outbound mail is almost certainly ham, the majority of it's content is
going to be specific to our business sect
Our scanning program has the ability to archive all e-mail, both inbound
and outbound, which we have been doing for months now. Given that your
outbound mail is almost certainly ham, the majority of it's content is
going to be specific to our business sector, wouldn't feeding outbounds
through bay
