Hi Amedee, I'm glad that you are 100% confident that you'll never get any false positives. Unfortunately, I can't share that level of confidence, at least not at this time. I'm just not a trusting enough person to do so. Also, I have already seen enough false-positives from SpamBayes that indicate to me that I shouldn't yet trust it above a certain level. But I think I will always want to review my spam folder. Initially, it's just a matter of getting the spam out of my way so I can look at my important email right away, then look at my spam folder later, just to make sure everything is kosher.
I believe that spammers are persistent, and good at what they do. As they are able to make their junk email look more and more like legitimate email (to anti-spam filters), this automatically reduces the legitimacy of non-spam messages. It is for this reason that I could never trust an anti-spam product 100%. Darn those spammer guys. For me, it's either in my Inbox, or it's not. After that it's not really very important to me what the percentage of clues is for a given message. This is just my way of looking at it. I'm guessing, wait strike that, I don't need to guess, that not everybody is going to look at it the same way as I do. I just wanted to share my experience is all. I still like SpamBayes overall and I'll continue to use it for the time being. I'm an IT support guy, and I even recommend SpamBayes to many people that I help. I agree with your theory about the English language thing, it makes sense. Thanks again, -scott > -----Original Message----- > From: Amedee Van Gasse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, October 20, 2006 9:00 AM > To: Scott > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Spambayes] SpamBayes feedback > > Op vrijdag 20-10-2006 om 07:27 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Scott: > > > [-] I don't like having a "Junk Suspects" folder. To me, this just > > means that I have two spam folders to manage instead of > one. As a work > > around, I have just set both spam and spam suspects to go > to the same > > Junk folder. I just made this change, so I don't yet know > if this will > > cause any problems, but I don't see why it should. I just wanted to > > let you know that I think it's not overly useful, to have > the Suspects > > folder I mean, if the spam is getting separated from my > Inbox in the > > first place, and I have to evaluate it anyway, that it > should all be > > in the same spam folder. My previous comment about "ever-changing > > tactics" on the part of the spammers should be a good > example of the fact that what is and isn't spam is hard to determine. > > Therefore, I cannot (and should not) trust 100% that > everything that > > goes into the Junk folder really is spam, and that everything that > > goes into the Suspects folder isn't spam. Hence, I have to > manage both. > > Scott, > > I respectfully disagree. > For me, the spam folder contains spam that is really, really, > really spam. I'm so confident about it that my procmail > doesn't even put it in a spam folder but directly in /dev/null. > I also have 2 "suspect" folders: possible ham and possible spam. > About 1 or 2 messages wind up in these folders every day (of > the several hundreds that arrive, according to postfix) > > To be honest, having a native language that isn't English helps a lot. > This means that bayesian spam filters are more effective for > languages that aren't used a lot in spam. Just my pet theory. > > -- > Amedee > _______________________________________________ [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes Check the FAQ before asking: http://spambayes.sf.net/faq.html
