Raquel Rice said:
> Thank you for a good explanation of how the bayes filters work. It
> seems to me that the onus is on me then to make sure whatever mail I
> get, gets fed back to the "bayes learning engine". That way by the
> time the flood hits, I've trained our filters to respond correctly.
>
Just set your autolearn spam/ham high and low enough respectivelly that
you don't have to teach it.
I've handled a couple of thousand messages in the past few months, and I
haven't had to retrain it either way.
I'm lazy, and my users have not complained, and my thresholds are high
enough, that while it might not catch all the spam, it really never
classifies something as wrong.
I set autolearn_ham to from .00 to .4
and
and autolearn_spam from 9.5 to 12
Depending teh variety of mail I receive at the server, and whether it is
an internal or or external server.
--
Luke Computer Science System Administrator
Security Administrator,College of Engineering
Montana State University-Bozeman,Montana
> Thank you for a good explanation of how the bayes filters work. It
> seems to me that the onus is on me then to make sure whatever mail I
> get, gets fed back to the "bayes learning engine". That way by the
> time the flood hits, I've trained our filters to respond correctly.
>
Just set your autolearn spam/ham high and low enough respectivelly that
you don't have to teach it.
I've handled a couple of thousand messages in the past few months, and I
haven't had to retrain it either way.
I'm lazy, and my users have not complained, and my thresholds are high
enough, that while it might not catch all the spam, it really never
classifies something as wrong.
I set autolearn_ham to from .00 to .4
and
and autolearn_spam from 9.5 to 12
Depending teh variety of mail I receive at the server, and whether it is
an internal or or external server.
--
Luke Computer Science System Administrator
Security Administrator,College of Engineering
Montana State University-Bozeman,Montana