Erik Max Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> "Monique Y. Herman" wrote:
>
>> Have you considered running spamassassin or similar to cut
>> down on this noise?

[...]

> I've thought about it.  I have some misgivings, simply because
> I'm tired of getting any false positives at all.

FYI, I've *never* seen a false positive using the spambayes
classifier.  It makes a nice front-end to TMDA, especially since
it's written in Python.  I keep meaning to plug the two together
sometime.

Pure Bayesian approaches are a little safer IMHO than rule-based
because you don't have to trust someone else's idea of what you
consider ham.

-Drew

_____________________________________________
tmda-users mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users

Reply via email to