> Personally i'm happy with the current setup but i was asked this > question and it got me thinking, so i thought the knowledgable > people > on this list would be able to share their opinions. >> That said, if you really want this, how about setting the scores >> for each to, say, 0.1? That'll be so small it'll be unlikely to >> affect >> the overall score significantly, but still have the tokens >> available for >> bayes learning. > Yes that would do what i was suggesting, but why not do that from > the > start, why assign scores to these tests at all? The reasoning behind > the question is that Bayes will be better suited to judge how to > score > these tests based on individual users spam/ham. For example, some > tests blacklist yahoo.com, obviously for a user with lots of > contacts > who use yahoo.com will want their scoring to adapt to give a lower > score to this test, as classification by Bayes would do. > Does that make any sense? What do you think?
I suppose this reasoning extends to any of the tests, not just the DNSBL tests. Maybe its more of a philosophical question, or maybe there is some concrete reasoning behind how Bayes works as to why it is done this way? Cheers, Mat
