Henrik K wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 06:58:52AM -0700, Happy Chap wrote:
>
> Do the tokens look such that they might be used in legimate messages?
> Usually you just have to sa-learn --spam enough of such spams to get
> atleast
> BAYES_50.
>
> I have no idea what kind of spams they are, but it all depends on whether
> they have any tokens in common. But I can tell you that it's very rare to
> get BAYES_00 for spam if you just learn them properly.
>
>
Hi Henrik,
Certainly some of them look legitimate. Maybe we just haven't got enough
into sa-learn yet for it to have any effect. I don't know exactly, but
suppose the user's been getting 20 per day for say 8 weeks (these are both
guesses). So that's around 800 that should have been used to train bayes IF
the user had sent every one for training. I can see they have about 34k
identified spam mails in their bayes db, so these extra 800 would amount to
about 2%. Perhaps that's just not enough?
Thanks, David.
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Text-contained-in-HTML-comments-causing-BAYES_00-to-classify-as-non-spam-tp29342874p29350853.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
