On 09/10/2014 04:29 PM, Alex Regan wrote:
Hi,
For several months I've been using
bayes_auto_learn_threshold_nonspam -1.0
and so far no more false negatives have been learnt as ham which is
was hoping for.
If you're using autolearn, you may want to play with that threshold..
Based on your expertise with Bayes, should we change the default for
3.4.1? I'm +1 for it.
I'd really like some more ppl to test that and hear some feedback before
we change any defaults.
I't's nothing we can test via masschecks
My nonspam threshold has been -1.0 for many years - since the first time
I also saw low-scoring spam hit this value.
I also have quite a few messages at -100.0 from whitelisting, but I
somehow figured out long ago that they are exempt from being added to
bayes, correct?
correct!
tflags USER_IN_WHITELIST userconf nice noautolearn
