Yes, I completely agree. I'll be working on "hinting" the rules and having the mutation part of the GA tend to move scores in the right direction after I get 2.11 out.
C On 2/28/02 9:36 AM, "Greg Ward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Executive summary: I think that unconstraining the GA was an interesting > idea, but not 100% successful. Perhaps the GA needs hints as to which > scores are spam markers and which are not, so it can keep spam markers > out of negative territory. Maybe it should warn about spam-marker tests > that want to be negative: that indicates that there's something wrong > either with the test or with the corpus. > > Greg _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
