Daniel Aquino wrote: > Is spam assassin smart enough to not auto-learn (bayesian) spam if the > default tests "allready" detect it as spam... ? What I'm wondering is > if the other tests have allready deamed it to be spam, then why would > you want to increase the size of your bayesian db... Bayesian I > believe would be better applied to messages that appear to be slipping > past the other tests...
It has to know which is which. So you would train (Ideally) equally on both. If you trained nothing but ham, it would think everything in the world was ham, other way around for spam. -- Thanks, James
