Theo Van Dinter wrote on Sun, 29 Aug 2004 11:31:40 -0400: > You can read the wiki for why scores get generated the way they do.
The wiki at apache.org or the one at exit0.us? I suppose the first and checked it but didn't find it. Ah, wait, DevelopmentStuff/4. Stuff about scoring. Is it that what you refer to? I'm not sure if it answers my question, though. > As for BAYES_00 and BAYES_99, they're by far my most hit rules for > ham/spam respectively: > > 1 BAYES_00 6953 93.35% > 1 BAYES_99 58233 87.46% > That looks very much like my 2.63 results, 00 and 99 where indeed the most successful rules, hitting on almost every message and being almost 100% accurate. Now with 3.00 I still have 00 scoring quite often (correctly), actually at 100%, but 99 is far off (it marks only about 50% of the spam) and I often see 50 (actually more often than 99) which usually I had never seen. I use a db which got upgraded from 2 to 3. It looks to me that SA 3.0 assigns BAYES_99 somewhat differently from SA 2.6x, so the "old" database doesn't provide the same basis for assigning 99's than it did for 2.6x. That should correct itself over time, but nonetheless made me wonder. Maybe it's not caused by SA at all but by MailScanner? I just ran a message that scored BAYES_50 thru SA again and it scores BAYES_99 now. It's unlikely that it changes so much within 40 minutes (and no spam messages in that time, so no spam tokens learned), or not? Kai -- Kai Sch�tzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com IE-Center: http://ie5.de & http://msie.winware.org
