Karsten Br?ckelmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That is not a smart move, IMHO. A Bayes score of 0.5 does NOT mean, > Bayes is 50% certain it's spam. It DOES mean, that Bayes does know > nothing. Absolutely nothing. > > Between BAYES_00 (aka ~100% sure it is ham) and BAYES_99 (aka ~100% sure > it is spam), BAYES_50 is like a shrugging. It is not a sign of being > spammy. You could just as well lower your spam threshold to 3.0. > > If you really feel a need to punish BAYES_50 like *that*, my advice is > to properly train your Bayes instead.
Thanks for the advice, and I know perfectly well what BAYES_50 is *supposed* to mean for *most* people. This may not be a smart move for you, but it works remarkably well for us. False positives (which, to be clear, are seldom) can be found in a user's spam folder; there are a number of other idiosyncrasies that are off-topic here. In any case, I understand how SA works and acknowledge the implications of fiddling with the rules. TIMTOWDI. Thank you. -- Sahil Tandon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
