26 Dec
2006
26 Dec
'06
4:59 p.m.
On Tuesday 26 December 2006 17:09, jdow wrote:
whack
Scores. The magic is in scores. No single rule (usually) should be allowed to define spam. (BAYES_99 is good enough here I score it high enough to guarantee markup as spam. Then I rely on the small number of negative scoring rules to save random ham messages that might get all the way to 0.99 BAYES spam probability.)
Besides, WTF good is Bayes with image spam? {^_^}
Answering a question with a question: When was the last time that anyone received an email with a GIF image that was _not_ spam? -- cmg