On Mon, 09 Feb 2009 01:05:35 +0100 Karsten Bräckelmann <guent...@rudersport.de> wrote:
> > It was good for a laugh, really. :) Until a strange feeling crept > > over me, realizing the words... > > > > Confirmed. That paragraph *severely* affected Bayes for me. No Bayes > > training with that mail up to that point, results reproducible. > > > > BAYES_99 probability 1.0000 WITHOUT that text > > BAYES_50 probability 0.5905 with that poisonous snippet > > Got a second, almost identical one. After learning both, Bayes is back > to speed. The first, original spam including that snippet now also > scores BAYES_99 with a probability of 1.0000. > > Oh, and the text actually is incorrect. Neither has been sent from the > USA, though it actually are dial-ups. ;) The text is lifted from here: http://www.joewein.de/sw/spam-replica-watches.htm
