* "Keith C. Ivey" <kcivey@cpcug.org> [2004:02:25:23:55:15-0500] scribed:
<snip />
> Along with those five examples of correctly identified spams,
> you did post two examples where the AWL adjustment may have
> caused a false negative. But in both cases the message
> triggered BAYES_00, which probably had a larger contribution to
> the miscategorization. Judging by those I'd say the real
> problem is spam being incorrectly autolearned as ham. Spam
> should not be getting BAYES_00 or BAYES_01, as it is in the
> majority of your examples. Maybe you should be blaming
> autolearning rather than autowhitelisting.
I am intrigued by your last sentence. Care to expound?
--
Best Regards,
mds
mds resource
877.596.8237
-
Dare to fix things before they break . . .
-
Our capacity for understanding is inversely proportional to how much
we think we know. The more I know, the more I know I don't know . . .
--
<snip />
> Along with those five examples of correctly identified spams,
> you did post two examples where the AWL adjustment may have
> caused a false negative. But in both cases the message
> triggered BAYES_00, which probably had a larger contribution to
> the miscategorization. Judging by those I'd say the real
> problem is spam being incorrectly autolearned as ham. Spam
> should not be getting BAYES_00 or BAYES_01, as it is in the
> majority of your examples. Maybe you should be blaming
> autolearning rather than autowhitelisting.
I am intrigued by your last sentence. Care to expound?
--
Best Regards,
mds
mds resource
877.596.8237
-
Dare to fix things before they break . . .
-
Our capacity for understanding is inversely proportional to how much
we think we know. The more I know, the more I know I don't know . . .
--