I agree. I think that ultimately a second bayesian filter that was
trained on only rule names could replace the SA scoring and become self
scoring rules.
Tony Godshall wrote:
Hi, Justin, all.
I'm doing nearly the opposite:
My upstream runs spamassasin. I run a a non-naive bayesian
(crm114) myself. The default config for crm114 is to strip spamassassin's
headers, but I've found that the SA headers give crm114 very very good hints,
and have acheived (to me, subjectively) amazing accuracy, not just for
spam vs nonspam but for spam vs 20 nonspam mailboxes, including troublesome
spammish lists like [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It seems to me that the insertion of the results of the bevy of SA
tests improve the
results of bayesian learning significantly.
Tony
