On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 08:10:38AM +0000, Grega via users wrote: > Also this: > > Rule Description Score Total Ham Col6 Spam Col8 > BAYES_40 Bayes spam probability is 20 to 40% 0.00 2,784 > 2,721 97.7 63 2.3 > BAYES_50 Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60% 0.80 126 93 > 73.8 33 26.2 > BAYES_60 Bayes spam probability is 60 to 80% 1.50 437 127 > 29.1 310 70.9 > BAYES_80 Bayes spam probability is 80 to 95% 7.00 266 1 > 0.4 265 99.6 > > I only have BAYES_40 to BAYES_80 after clearing bayes DB and manually > RE-learning on 2500 HAM and 2500 SPAM messages. > So NO BAYES lower than 40 or higher than 80... > > There is 100% something wrong here, bayes in not decision maker at all, for > me it is useless. This indecisiveness along with fact that some mails arent > even BAYES scored makes me think there is a bug or I implemented it wrong?
Perhaps running via "spamassassin -D -t" on a message would show why? I'm suspecting the bayes is poisoned... that might be due to spammer activity (esp. if you have bayes_auto_learn enabled), or due to needless headers being classified, for example. in SA 3.x (not yet on 4.x), I had to bayes_ignore_header lots of stuff to get it to perform resonably, esp. Received headers, or those would often overwhelm other more useful tokens (like body matches) -- Opinions above are GNU-copylefted.
