You'll confuse the whole Bayes database if you do anything different. Why in goodness name put a minimum score of 5 in the first place, if you're going to contradict yourself?
Actually, Tom's dead right.
If it's spam, feed it to the bayes learner as spam; if it's ham, do the opposite. Stuff that the learner got wrong is especially valuable, as it "fixes" the tokens that were misleading it in the first place.
That's exactly what I was saying (perhaps I'd misunderstood Tom.) I was trying to say that teaching it spam under the level that one has defined as being spam - even if it is spam - amounts to defeating one's own purpose. One can start doing that *after* one's got one's initial biased database, but at least give the whole thing a reasonable base on which to begin.
Best,
Tony
-- Tony Earnshaw
- Deyr fé, deyr frendr deyr sjálfr 'it sama - ek veit ein aldrigi deyr - dómr um dauđan hvern.
From Hávamál - the voice of the gods.
http://j-walk.com/blog/docs/conference.htm http://www.billy.demon.nl Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: eBay Great deals on office technology -- on eBay now! Click here: http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/711-11697-6916-5 _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
