[Spambayes] counterweight: it really works!

Matt Sergeant msergeant@startechgroup.co.uk
Tue Nov 5 10:27:40 2002

Rob W.W. Hooft said the following on 05/11/02 07:09:
> Matt Sergeant wrote:
>>Rob Hooft said the following on 04/11/02 06:26:
>>>Just to remind everyone that this software really works! Its spambayes 
>>>score deviates from 1.0 only by about 10**-8, but SA didn't see much
>>Please don't compare to 4 months old SpamAssassin's. Upgrade if you want 
>>to compare. Thanks.
> OK, sorry, maybe I should have updated. OTOH, that is part of the 
> problem, isn't it?

As I explained in another email, both spambayes (and other statistical 
solutions) and SpamAssassin need constantly updating. It's just that 
spambayes is slightly easier as the manual intervention you have to do 
isn't far off your regular reading of email (whereas spamassassin 
requires you to drop into a console and type: perl -MCPAN -e 'install 
Mail::SpamAssassin'). Of course you could put the latter in a cron job, 
but most sensible people wouldn't trust it.

BTW: I'm not suggesting that SA would have caught that particular spam - 
it probably wouldn't have, I just hate to see invalid comparisons.