Bret Miller wrote:
I have a bayes question I am hoping someone may be able to
answer for me. Since implementing bayes it has been doing a
very good job except for one thing.
One particular spam email is not getting tagged as spam. My
rules are scoring the email high enough to be tagge
> FWIW, if you had left BAYES_00 with its default score, as opposed to
> increasing it to -4.9, this mail would have been flagged as spam.
At least in my case (admittedly using SA 2.64 not 3.x) -4.9 appears to
be the default score for BAYES_00. At least, that's what it was before I
set it to zero,
> I have a bayes question I am hoping someone may be able to
> answer for me. Since implementing bayes it has been doing a
> very good job except for one thing.
>
> One particular spam email is not getting tagged as spam. My
> rules are scoring the email high enough to be tagged as spam,
> but i
On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 05:05:26PM -0500, John W Mickevich wrote:
> I am very new to bayes so some of my terms may be incorrect. But it would
> appear that bayes has "learned" something incorrectly.
Not necessarily. It means that the tokens found in the message which are also
found in the DB a
Hi all!
I have a bayes question I am hoping someone may be able to answer for me.
Since implementing bayes it has been doing a very good job except for one
thing.
One particular spam email is not getting tagged as spam. My rules are
scoring the email high enough to be tagged as spam, but
