On Monday 14 August 2006 11:02, Nigel Frankcom took the opportunity to say:
> On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 01:52:33 -0700, "jdow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >(I manually train here. I distrust automatic training.)
> >
> >{^_^}
>
> I agree with not autotraining, imo it's a damned good way to get your
> bay
From: "Beast" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Nigel Frankcom wrote:
I will turn on auto leaarn mostly because I need to feed more HAM to SA
(so far I only feed ham for any false positive which is very low daily
and i think that is not good enough for SA)
If it is well trained then Bayes should
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:28:21 +0700, Beast <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Nigel Frankcom wrote:
>>
I will turn on auto leaarn mostly because I need to feed more HAM to SA
(so far I only feed ham for any false positive which is very low daily
and i think that is not good enough for
Nigel Frankcom wrote:
I will turn on auto leaarn mostly because I need to feed more HAM to SA
(so far I only feed ham for any false positive which is very low daily
and i think that is not good enough for SA)
If it is well trained then Bayes should be hitting. It may be that
SA cannot
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 01:52:33 -0700, "jdow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>From: "Beast" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> jdow wrote:
>>> From: "Beast" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>
Hi,
From some (spam) mail which not caught by SA, it seems that bayes is
not applied to this mail.
X-Sp
From: "Beast" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
jdow wrote:
From: "Beast" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi,
From some (spam) mail which not caught by SA, it seems that bayes is
not applied to this mail.
X-Spam-Report:
* 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
* 1.7 SARE_SPEC_ROLEX Rolex watch spa
Nigel Frankcom wrote:
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 12:21:16 +0700, Beast <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
From some (spam) mail which not caught by SA, it seems that bayes is
not applied to this mail.
X-Spam-Report:
* 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
* 1.7 SARE_SPEC_ROLEX Rol
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 12:21:16 +0700, Beast <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi,
>
> From some (spam) mail which not caught by SA, it seems that bayes is
>not applied to this mail.
>
>X-Spam-Report:
> * 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
> * 1.7 SARE_SPEC_ROLEX Rolex watch spam
>X-S
jdow wrote:
From: "Beast" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi,
From some (spam) mail which not caught by SA, it seems that bayes is
not applied to this mail.
X-Spam-Report:
* 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
* 1.7 SARE_SPEC_ROLEX Rolex watch spam
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.7 requi
From: "Beast" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi,
From some (spam) mail which not caught by SA, it seems that bayes is
not applied to this mail.
X-Spam-Report:
* 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
* 1.7 SARE_SPEC_ROLEX Rolex watch spam
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.7 required=5.2 tests
Hi,
From some (spam) mail which not caught by SA, it seems that bayes is
not applied to this mail.
X-Spam-Report:
* 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
* 1.7 SARE_SPEC_ROLEX Rolex watch spam
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.7 required=5.2 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SARE_SPEC_ROLEX
au
11 matches
Mail list logo
