Allie, On 22-02-2003 01:06, you [A] wrote in <mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: A> In <mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, A> Peter Fjelsten [PF] wrote:'
PF>> Actually, I only get false negatives with Bayesian and no false PF>> positives with blacklists. A> No false positives with BlackLists? Wow! :) Nevertheless the truth. As I wrote, I don't use all the default ones. PF>> What is the basis of your statement? A> When I first got SpamPal, I chose the intermediate level for spam A> detection. I then used a filter to create a copy of all messages A> designated as Spam and place the copies in a special folder. "intermediate level"? A> I don't use SpamPal in this way anymore. I now filter all my A> known mail and then have SpamPal work with what's left. It has A> been doing fairly well there. This is the way mine is set up too. PF>> I have been using SpamPal (with Bayesian) for more than a month now PF>> with only Bayesian giving me problems. A> The Bayesian filter plug-in is yet to detect one of my spam A> messages. :/ Mine actually detect more than it should. PF>> But I unchecked some of the Blacklists (e.g SpamCop's). A> I have SpamCop's enabled. With it disabled, SpamPal was missing A> Spam. In my view, SpamCop is too hard. Actually, banning Korean and Chinese IPs get me a long way (I don't know anyone there). -- <greeting> Best regards </greeting> <author> Peter Fjelsten </author> <thebat version> 1.63 Beta/7 </thebat version> <os> Windows XP 5.1.2600 Service Pack 1</os> ________________________________________________ Current version is 1.62 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
