On 05.03.12 12:15, RW wrote: >I don't like it. It relies on FPs being removed from the SPAM folder >rather than spam being sent to a learn-spam folder.
On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 15:35:05 +0100 Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:Pardon me, but: Usage for end users *move mail into SPAM folder to classify as spam *move mail out of SPAM folder to classify as not spam isn't the former what you want?
On 07.03.12 21:44, RW wrote:
I'm more concerned about what happens to the mail that isn't moved.
apparently nothing, because it is assumed to be correctly evaluated.
I think positive training is better than supervised autolearning
those above clearly indicate postive and negative trainin, or do you have different informations?
The scheme might work well for pure train-on-error, but that's not really practical on Spamassassin where the classification is distinct from the Bayes result.
pardon? -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. Boost your system's speed by 500% - DEL C:\WINDOWS\*.*
