From: "Matt Kettler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
At 10:50 AM 1/10/2006, Chris Santerre wrote:
I have long said that IMHO, I do not think bayes is worth it. Left
unattended, it isn't as good. A simple rule can take out a lot of spam.
Some may say rule writing is more complicated then training bayes. Maybe.
Not so much the rule writing, but the figuring out what to look for and
testing for FPs.
Interesting.. For me, BAYES_99 is right between SURBL and URIBL in terms of
hits. (And has 98.91% of URIBL's total hits) I find it completely
indispensable.
It's number 1 here on scoring spam, 83.22 for 0.05 of ham with "can't
remember the last ham scoring on 99 that hit the spam folder." 99 has
a score of 5 here because it does, all alone, tag spam that no other
rule hits. XBL is the best BL here at the moment, 55.50% for 0.04% of
hits on ham.
I rarely train manually, except at initial setup where I feed it a good
base learning. (the autolearner can sometimes go awry if you don't train
some mail manually before letting it go.)
I manually learn, particularly on spam not marked as spam that has a
low BAYES score and some "meat in it." (I don't bother with content
free spam. Those very quickly score higher due to BL hits that pop up
like magic.)
{^_^}
