Raquel Rice wrote:
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 13:46:25 -0500 (EST)
Charles Gregory <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The problem with your theory, is that your bayes hasn't been trained the way mine has, nor has mine been trained the way that Matt's has. The likelihood of any given spam getting past two of us, let alone all three of us, is very slim indeed.
Unfortunately the sample spam I've sent is quite good at defeating bayes with its poison and hiding the poison from both Spamassassin rules and the eye of the recipient.
