On Mon, 2013-02-11 at 16:00 +0100, Benny Pedersen wrote: > Den 07-02-2013 17:13, Marc Perkel skrev: > > Because when a message uses invisible text to poison bayes then I > > don't want to learn that because it will make bayes less effective. > > that still does not make sense, if you say an hidded word is spam then > its spam, no matter if both background and forground colors is white, so > is bayes > > but i can agree if you say that in 1000 ham and 1000 spam mails this > problem is then its bayes poison > Maybe there's a case for classifying mail as ham/spam by reading the raw mail instead of looking at it with an MUA and being shown the HTML part?
Martin
