>> I have been using the free version of AntispamSniper for a couple >> months now and I like it a lot. It has been running at 98.8% >> accuracy after a two-week training period.
LSB> On what basis did you select it? Have you tried other add-ins? I didn't try Agava Antispam Servant, but I have tried BayesIt, K9 and SpamPal. SpamPal was nearly 100% accurate for a long, long time, but started missing a large proportion of the HTML stock tip spam. I've never had a false positive with SpamPal. It's a nice set-it-and-forget-it spam filter. K9 was okay, but it seemed to need constant training (at least it did for the type of spam I get). It also gave a lot of false positives, so I had to monitor my spam folder regularly. I never understood why, but I was getting about 10% accuracy with BayesIt despite training it with hundreds of spam and non-spam messages. I was frustrated, so I dumped it. As you can see, my criteria for a good spam filter are accuracy, no false positives, and ease of training. Free is nice, too :) -- Code 2 :canadaflag: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] The Bat! version 2.12.00 on Windows XP Service Pack 2 Majorcan shop entrance: English well talking. ________________________________________________ Current version is 3.99 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
