http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5497
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-07 05:16 ------- (In reply to comment #22) > the small number of ham hit with a -1.0 threshold (about 1.21% of ham > mail according to mass-checks, see bug 5257) should be no problem to it. If the change of a threshold to -1.0 was intended to reduce the number of ham message fed into bayes, in my view it is a wrong solution to the problem. Moving a threshold into gaussian periphery results in a skewed/distorted view being presented to autolearning. If the only intention is to reduce the amount of ham fed to autolearner, some decimation can be used, like comparing a random generator value to some threshold, say 0.2 would keep every fifth ham on the average for autolearning and ignore the rest. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
