Brendon> I've just started using spambayes again after a while away from
Brendon> it. Now, 3 days in, I notice that I've trained on far more
Brendon> spam than ham. (Total emails trained: Spam: *432* Ham: *64) I
Brendon> seem to remember that this was previously my experience in the
Brendon> past.
Are you training on every message you receive or just the mistakes? Most
people generally only train on the mistakes and unsures. Your ratio is
about 7:1. That's a bit high. I'm maintaining about a 1:1 ratio, currently
have about 120 each of ham and spam dating back to March (4+ months). (I
cheat though. My email comes through Gmail these days, so I get the benefits
- and shortcomings - of their system.)
Brendon> My question is; has anybody really tested the assertion that
Brendon> leads to the message: "**Warning: you have much more spam than
Brendon> ham - SpamBayes works best with approximately even numbers of
Brendon> ham and spam."?*
Yes, I believe it was tested pretty thoroughly back in the day.
Skip
_______________________________________________
SpamBayes@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes
Check the FAQ before asking: http://spambayes.sf.net/faq.html
