Hello DZ-Jay,
Sunday, August 15, 2004, 9:31:38 AM, you wrote:
DJ Some time around 08/15/2004 09:23:46, I think I heard MikeD (3) say:
Hello Andre,
Sunday, August 15, 2004, 6:44:17 AM, you wrote:
AW Have you deleted you spam and non-spam dictionary files when you
AW upgraded?
Funny, that.
Hello Pete,
Sunday, August 15, 2004, 9:52:14 AM, you wrote:
PH Sunday, August 15, 2004, 7:44:17 AM, you wrote:
AW Hello MikeD,
AW On 14 Aug 2004 at 14:47:24 -0500 GMT [21:47 CEST] you wrote:
AW Have you deleted you spam and non-spam dictionary files when you
AW upgraded?
PH What are their
Hello DZ-Jay,
Sunday, August 15, 2004, 10:20:52 AM, you wrote:
DJ Some time around 08/15/2004 09:24:56, I think I heard MikeD (3) say:
DJ I was too. I just upgraded yesterday to 0.5.9 and I haven't
DJ noticed a difference. It does provide a white/black list, which I
DJ don't care to use
Hello George,
Sunday, August 15, 2004, 11:35:29 AM, you wrote:
GM DZ-Jay wrote:
DJ Some time around 08/15/2004 11:13:49, I think I heard Stuart Cuddy say:
What is Graham?
What is Spam-grade?
DJ AFAIK, spam-grade would be the probability of it being spam, and
DJ Graham, I suppose,
Hello DZ-Jay,
Sunday, August 15, 2004, 1:47:45 PM, you wrote:
It might be coincidence, but Paul Graham has written much about
Bayesian filtering. I'd guess it has something to do with his
methodology. Even if I'm wrong, there's some interesting reading at:
Hello DZ-Jay,
On 14 Aug 2004 at 14:42:17 -0400 GMT [20:42 CEST] you wrote:
DJ That makes sense. But do you know how the weight is
DJ calculated? I can assume it is the product of its initial
DJ probability by the regarding threshold value, is that true?
I don't program the thing. For specific
Hello MikeD,
On 14 Aug 2004 at 14:47:24 -0500 GMT [21:47 CEST] you wrote:
M I have been following this thread since I have been having some
M problems too. I was using the old version (0.4gm) until I upgraded to
M the current version of TB.
M The settings I used to use don't seem to work any
Some time around 08/14/2004 22:24:58, I think I heard MikeD (3) say:
What settings are you using? Under the old version (0.4gm) I had it
trained and was getting most spam caught, no false positives with a
Move message setting of 10. Now I have gone down as low as 1 and as
high as 99 without
Some time around 08/14/2004 23:28:14, I think I heard Thomas Fernandez say:
DJ That makes sense. But do you know how the weight is calculated?
Check out for a mathematician called Bayes. 19th century, IIRC.
Have you read at all the entire thread, or did you just decided to come in and offer
Some time around 08/15/2004 07:43:05, I think I heard Andre Wichartz say:
Hello DZ-Jay,
On 14 Aug 2004 at 14:42:17 -0400 GMT [20:42 CEST] you wrote:
DJ That makes sense. But do you know how the weight is
DJ calculated? I can assume it is the product of its initial
DJ probability by the
Hello Andre,
Sunday, August 15, 2004, 6:44:17 AM, you wrote:
AW Hello MikeD,
AW On 14 Aug 2004 at 14:47:24 -0500 GMT [21:47 CEST] you wrote:
AW Have you deleted you spam and non-spam dictionary files when you
AW upgraded?
Funny, that. When I first upgraded I did not and it seemed to work
Hello DZ-Jay,
Sunday, August 15, 2004, 8:12:23 AM, you wrote:
DJ Some time around 08/14/2004 22:24:58, I think I heard MikeD (3) say:
What settings are you using? Under the old version (0.4gm) I had it
trained and was getting most spam caught, no false positives with a
Move message setting
Hello DZ-Jay,
On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 09:20:41 -0400 GMT (15/08/2004, 20:20 +0700 GMT),
DZ-Jay wrote:
DJ That makes sense. But do you know how the weight is calculated?
Check out for a mathematician called Bayes. 19th century, IIRC.
DJ Have you read at all the entire thread, or did you just
DJ
Some time around 08/15/2004 09:28:42, I think I heard Thomas Fernandez say:
DJ What is not that simple? The bayesian algorithm or how the
DJ regarding threshold is used by the plugin?
The Bayesian algorithms. Your question, to which I answered, could be
understood this way, so I don't feel I
Some time around 08/15/2004 09:24:56, I think I heard MikeD (3) say:
DJ I started with the move message setting at 40 and continued
DJ to lowered it without noticing any effect. That's when I checked
DJ the BAYESIT.LOG file and realized that all messages are marked
DJ with either 100/99 % or 0%
Some time around 08/15/2004 09:23:46, I think I heard MikeD (3) say:
Hello Andre,
Sunday, August 15, 2004, 6:44:17 AM, you wrote:
AW Have you deleted you spam and non-spam dictionary files when you
AW upgraded?
Funny, that. When I first upgraded I did not and it seemed to work
fine ...
Hello DZ-Jay,
15-Aug-2004 15:12, you wrote:
I checked the BAYESIT.LOG file and realized that all messages are
marked with either 100/99 % or 0% probability, which means that no matter
how low I set the parameter, it will continue working the same. I don't
understand how come there is no
Some time around 08/15/2004 10:20:47, I think I heard Alexander S. Kunz say:
I just checked my POPfile bucket pages and found it very interesting that,
despite spam is only 5.8% of my messages (lucky me, hu?), the distinct
word count for those spam messages is by far the highest (only messages
Sunday, August 15, 2004, 7:44:17 AM, you wrote:
AW Hello MikeD,
AW On 14 Aug 2004 at 14:47:24 -0500 GMT [21:47 CEST] you wrote:
AW Have you deleted you spam and non-spam dictionary files when you
AW upgraded?
What are their names and where are they?
--
Some time around 08/15/2004 10:52:14, I think I heard Pete Holsberg say:
Sunday, August 15, 2004, 7:44:17 AM, you wrote:
AW Hello MikeD,
AW On 14 Aug 2004 at 14:47:24 -0500 GMT [21:47 CEST] you wrote:
AW Have you deleted you spam and non-spam dictionary files when you
AW upgraded?
What are
Some time around 08/15/2004 09:24:56, I think I heard MikeD (3) say:
DJ I was too. I just upgraded yesterday to 0.5.9 and I haven't
DJ noticed a difference. It does provide a white/black list, which I
DJ don't care to use because it defeats the purpose of a Bayesian
DJ filter (there's huge
Hello DZ-Jay,
Sunday, August 15, 2004, 9:25:14 AM, you wrote:
DJ However, I recently noticed why some obviously spam messages
DJ are given a probability of 0%: Apparently the analysis engine is
DJ regarding a few empty tokens with a value of 0%, which
DJ unspamifies the final value, for example,
Some time around 08/15/2004 11:13:49, I think I heard Stuart Cuddy say:
What is Graham?
What is Spam-grade?
AFAIK, spam-grade would be the probability of it being spam, and Graham, I suppose,
means the probability of it being not-spam (I suppose, non-spam-grade ham-grade
graham ?)
Some time around 08/15/2004 11:13:49, I think I heard Stuart Cuddy say:
I am not seeing the empty tokens, but the following message is being
received without being caught. I sent it again to myself about 5 or
6 times and marked it as junk each time. The values do not seem to
change at
Sunday, August 15, 2004, 11:11:00 AM, you wrote:
DJ Some time around 08/15/2004 10:52:14, I think I heard Pete Holsberg say:
Sunday, August 15, 2004, 7:44:17 AM, you wrote:
AW Hello MikeD,
AW On 14 Aug 2004 at 14:47:24 -0500 GMT [21:47 CEST] you wrote:
AW Have you deleted you spam and
Some time around 08/15/2004 11:57:15, I think I heard Pete Holsberg say:
Sunday, August 15, 2004, 11:11:00 AM, you wrote:
DJ Some time around 08/15/2004 10:52:14, I think I heard Pete Holsberg say:
DJTB! installation dir\BayesIt\base
DJ or
DJTB! installation dir\MAIL\BayesIt\base
???
DZ-Jay wrote:
DJ Some time around 08/15/2004 11:13:49, I think I heard Stuart Cuddy say:
What is Graham?
What is Spam-grade?
DJ AFAIK, spam-grade would be the probability of it being spam, and
DJ Graham, I suppose, means the probability of it being not-spam (I
DJ suppose, non-spam-grade
Some time around 08/15/2004 12:35:29, I think I heard George Mitchell say:
It might be coincidence, but Paul Graham has written much about
Bayesian filtering. I'd guess it has something to do with his
methodology. Even if I'm wrong, there's some interesting reading at:
Hello:
I've been running BayesIt for a while and it works beautifully. My accuracy
right now is at 96.75%, so I guess I shouldn't complain. But out of a few hundred
messages I get a day, it misses about 10 that look like obvious spam but were marked
as not-spam. I checked the
Hello DZ-Jay,
On 14 Aug 2004 at 09:28:34 -0400 GMT [15:28 CEST] you wrote:
DJ BTW, I do not understand very well the regarding threshold
DJ parameter, can someone explain it please?
From advanced.ini:
; this number shows, how much heavier non-spam tokens than spam. It
makes some kind of guard
Some time around 08/14/2004 10:34:25, I think I heard Andre Wichartz say:
Hello DZ-Jay,
On 14 Aug 2004 at 09:28:34 -0400 GMT [15:28 CEST] you wrote:
DJ BTW, I do not understand very well the regarding threshold
DJ parameter, can someone explain it please?
From advanced.ini:
; this number
Hello DZ-Jay,
On 14 Aug 2004 at 11:30:32 -0400 GMT [17:30 CEST] you wrote:
DJ Yes, I am aware of its definition, but what I don't understand
DJ is what would be the effect of changing it to, say, 1.2 from 1.5
DJ (apart from the academic answer of making non-spam tokens a bit less
DJ heavier).
Saturday, August 14, 2004, 12:27:41 PM, you wrote:
AW Hello DZ-Jay,
AW On 14 Aug 2004 at 11:30:32 -0400 GMT [17:30 CEST] you wrote:
DJ Yes, I am aware of its definition, but what I don't understand
DJ is what would be the effect of changing it to, say, 1.2 from 1.5
DJ (apart from the academic
Some time around 08/14/2004 12:34:07, I think I heard Pete Holsberg say:
Where do you do the setting???
In a file called ADVANCED.INI in the BayesIt working directory, or in the TB!
installation directory.
--
Powered by The Bat! v.2.12.00,
Hindered by MS Windows 2000 v.5.0 build 2195
Some time around 08/14/2004 12:27:41, I think I heard Andre Wichartz say:
Assume a word orccurs equally often in spam and non-spam mails. If you
set the value to 1 the word will get a spam propability of 0.5. If you
set it to a higher value the word will get something lower than 0.5.
Words in
Saturday, August 14, 2004, 2:37:03 PM, you wrote:
DJ Some time around 08/14/2004 12:34:07, I think I heard Pete Holsberg say:
Where do you do the setting???
DJ In a file called ADVANCED.INI in the BayesIt working directory, or
DJ in the TB! installation directory.
Not found anywhere on
Hello All,
I have been following this thread since I have been having some
problems too. I was using the old version (0.4gm) until I upgraded to
the current version of TB.
The settings I used to use don't seem to work any more and I either
get everything filtered as junk or nothing is filtered
Some time around 08/14/2004 15:47:24, I think I heard MikeD say:
The settings I used to use don't seem to work any more and I either
get everything filtered as junk or nothing is filtered as junk. I
trained it with about 2000 spam and 2000 ham messages and still no
joy. I have tried low
Some time around 08/14/2004 14:54:38, I think I heard Pete Holsberg say:
Saturday, August 14, 2004, 2:37:03 PM, you wrote:
DJ Some time around 08/14/2004 12:34:07, I think I heard Pete Holsberg say:
Where do you do the setting???
DJ In a file called ADVANCED.INI in the BayesIt working
Hello DZ-Jay,
Saturday, August 14, 2004, 5:31:59 PM, you wrote:
DJ Some time around 08/14/2004 15:47:24, I think I heard MikeD say:
The settings I used to use don't seem to work any more and I either
get everything filtered as junk or nothing is filtered as junk. I
trained it with about 2000
Hello DZ-Jay,
On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 14:42:17 -0400 GMT (15/08/2004, 01:42 +0700 GMT),
DZ-Jay wrote:
Assume a word orccurs equally often in spam and non-spam mails. If you
set the value to 1 the word will get a spam propability of 0.5. If you
set it to a higher value the word will get something
41 matches
Mail list logo
