On Sun, 11 Jan 2004, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
Send them to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I dug through my spam corpus and found
8 so far this month and just sent them off. We'll see what happens.
I agree on reporting them. But it should be obvious in the short term, if
these things become annoying, just
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Charles Gregory wrote:
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
Send them to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I dug through my spam corpus and found
8 so far this month and just sent them off. We'll see what happens.
I agree on reporting them. But it should be obvious in the
On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 11:20:42AM -0500, Gerry Doris wrote:
I just sent my copy to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and it bounced. I personally
think it was a REALLY bad idea to include these jokers in the scoring.
That's because it's habeas (note the a, not a u).
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
Photons
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
Send them to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I dug through my spam corpus and found
8 so far this month and just sent them off. We'll see what happens.
I agree on reporting them. But it should be obvious in the short term, if
these things become
Send them to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I dug through my spam
corpus and found
8 so far this month and just sent them off. We'll see what happens.
I agree on reporting them. But it should be obvious in the
short term, if
these things become annoying, just set the score for the
habeas rule
On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 11:26:46AM -0500, Jack Gostl wrote:
I sometimes wonder if the whole system wouldn't be smaller and stabler if
it were entirely Bayes based.
Well, sure it would be. But frankly, if you want Bayes only, there
are several other projects out there to look at... SpamBayes,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Theo Van Dinter writes:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 11:26:46AM -0500, Jack Gostl wrote:
I sometimes wonder if the whole system wouldn't be smaller and stabler if
it were entirely Bayes based.
Well, sure it would be. But frankly, if you want Bayes
