I think that the autolearn is bad, because it only learns from those spam messages that it knows to be spam for certain in any case, and the same for ham as well. OK, it does not necessarily mean that Bayes agrees what SpamAssassin thinks. Anyway, currently I have autolearn disabled and only feed Bayes those messages that SpamAssassin misses, spam or ham. Is this a correct way of thinking?
To conclude that autolearn is bad is a considerable misunderstanding of bayes. Bayes does NOT learn emails. It learns tokens. What bayes learns from one spam is applicable to other spams. Bayes can apply these lessons to find spams that would otherwise miss the ruleset, even if it's only fed 'high scoring spam".
In theory you should feed your bayes engine a fairly balanced diet of spam and nonspam, without consideration of wether or not SA caught it.
Of course I had to sa-learn a minimum of 200 messages before Bayes started working. Could it be that the Bayes stops working correctly if autolearn is not enabled?
It should continue to work even with autolearn off, but this does increase the need for you to keep feeding it messages manually and to feed it a balanced diet.
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100003ave/direct;at.aspnet_072303_01/01 _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
