-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 06 November 2003 10:34 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thu 06 Nov 03, 10:17 AM, Ryan Castellucci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > The other neat thing spam assassin can do, with bayesian filtering, is
>
On Thu 06 Nov 03, 10:17 AM, Ryan Castellucci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Thursday 06 November 2003 08:58 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Thu 06 Nov 03, 8:29 AM, R. Douglas Barbieri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > > On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 0
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 06 November 2003 08:58 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thu 06 Nov 03, 8:29 AM, R. Douglas Barbieri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 09:59:12PM -0800, Ryan Castellucci wrote:
> > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>
On Thu 06 Nov 03, 8:29 AM, R. Douglas Barbieri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 09:59:12PM -0800, Ryan Castellucci wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > On Wednesday 05 November 2003 09:24 pm, Ken Bloom wrote:
> > > Will SpamAssassin's bayenessian
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 09:59:12PM -0800, Ryan Castellucci wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wednesday 05 November 2003 09:24 pm, Ken Bloom wrote:
> > Will SpamAssassin's bayenessian be more effective if I train it on
> > every message that comes through (even ones th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 05 November 2003 09:24 pm, Ken Bloom wrote:
> Will SpamAssassin's bayenessian be more effective if I train it on
> every message that comes through (even ones that it's built in tests
> have already rejected as spam) or only on false negat