[spambayes-dev] A spectacular false positive

Tim Peters tim.one at comcast.net
Sat Nov 15 18:37:01 EST 2003

[Rob Hooft]
>>> I am now training on all mistakes and unsures, plus all ham scoring
>>> more than 0.02 and all spam scoring less than 0.99.

>> Then why not reset your ham and spam cutoffs to 0.02 and 0.99, to
>> match? Then you can describe the same thing as just "mistakes and
>> unsures" (which is what I mean by "mistake-based training").

> Because I still "never look" at anything that scores over 0.90. They
> are all spam.

I don't understand.  Suppose a message scores 0.93.  0.93 > 0.90, so by what
you just said you never look at it.  But 0.93 < 0.99, so by what you first
said you *do* train on it.  Is it possible to simulataneously both train on
a thing and never look at it?  I guess I don't know what "never look" means.
You mean you don't use your eyeballs to physically look at the 0.93 message,
but let spambayes auto-train on its own "it's spam" decision then?  That
would be consistent with all that you said, so I'm assuming now that's the
intended meaning.

More information about the spambayes-dev mailing list