On 8/16/2011 8:55 AM, Rodney Baker wrote: > On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 07:36:05 Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > >> After you fixed your mail processing chain to not have SA chew twice on >> the spam -- you should manually train Bayes, feeding it a lot of hand >> classified spam, and possibly ham. Check your 'sa-learn --dump magic' >> numbers. The Bayes score of 0.1 is way out of line. > Agreed. I do run sa-learn --spam (actually now have it scheduled to run > weekly > on a folder into which I drop all the non-classified spam messages) and --ham > (on a folder with messages that were false-positives).
When you are trying to fix a Bayes problem, it can be useful to feed it as much as possible. Put *all* your ham and *all* your spam (properly classified or not) into those folders and let Bayes learn from it. -- Bowie
