[Spambayes] Leaving for another tool. [BUG + FIX]
trebor at animeigo.com
Wed Dec 12 13:21:09 CET 2007
> On the plus side, I am noticing a significant difference this time
> around. Trained on just 20 messages so far and it is definitely working
> a lot better than my previous approach of training on everything
> (60,000+ messages - and took almost 300 messages to reach the same point
> I'm at now). Still have a ways to go before I know for certain.
> Training one message at a time is going to take a while.
I've been lurking on the list for ages, and have finally gotten a chance
to try out spambayes (moved to Thunderbird after gettting fed up with
Apple Mail). I have to echo Thomas' comments; Spambayes should train
properly when confronted with common user behavior in the mailreader
(ie: she tells spambayes when unsures are spam, and when spam is ham,
but usually not when unsures are ham).
I am probably recapitulating some old suggestions (or even, this is the
way that SB works already), but it occurs to me that you can deal with
the problem of database growth by simply cutting back the word counts
regularly (ie: when the spam or ham word count of any word exceeds some
number, divide all the word counts of everything in the database by 2)
and then zapping all of the middle-of-the-road noise words to get the
total word count down to some reasonable number. Wouldn't this also
deal with evolving spam signatures in a natural manner?
PS: It isn't immediately obvious from the web-based interface how to zap
your database, or exactly what the save+quit button really does.
More information about the SpamBayes