On Sun, 02 Aug 2009 17:15:52 +0200 Karsten Bräckelmann <guent...@rudersport.de> wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-08-02 at 02:00 +0100, RW wrote: > > On Sun, 02 Aug 2009 01:42:21 +0200 Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > > > It's a counter-measure against bad learning, to force at least > > > some MINIMAL manual training, before auto-learning kicks in. > > AFAIK it doesn't affect autoleaning at all, bayes_min_spam_num & > > bayes_min_ham_num control when scoring starts. > > Well, it *does* nonetheless. *shrug* > > As per the docs, that threshold controls when Bayes activates. Nothing > more, nothing less. Want to see for yourself? >.. > X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=17.3 required=8.0 > tests=EMPTY_MESSAGE,MISSING_DATE, > MISSING_HEADERS,MISSING_MID,MISSING_SUBJECT,NO_HEADERS_MESSAGE,NO_RECEIVED, > NO_RELAYS,TVD_SPACE_RATIO autolearn=spam version=3.2.5 > If you read back you'll see that that's consistent with what I wrote and the opposite of what you wrote. I said that the limits don't effect autolearning, just scoring (activation). Whatever you think you wrote, what you actually wrote was: " to force at least some MINIMAL manual training, before auto-learning kicks in" There's no ambiguity there, the use of the word "force" implies that manual training is a prerequisite to auto-learning.
