Bart Schaefer wrote: BS> What, so now all Bcc's are spam?
Nope, just a sign of spam. That's the beauty of weighted scoring. BS> I don't think the GA can possibly give a valid score to such a rule. How BS> can you have any confidence that there's a representative number of Bcc'd BS> messages in the non-spam corpus? How can you have any confidence that there's a representative number of anything in the corpus? By manually trying to make sure that it is so. I spend quit a bit of time before each run of the GA making sure the corpus is useful. Of course, useful means that it looks OK to me. If you are a person who regularly sends all your correspondence using the Bcc field instead of To or CC then you'll want to manually adjust the score the GA assigns. But you might also want to re-evaluate your email practices -- do you *really* need those messages to be bcc'd? C _______________________________________________________________ Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
