Bayes still effective?

[Raymond Dijkxhoorn]

Hi!

> >> This strikes me as a pretty effective way of circumventing bayes.  Is
> >> worth bothering with?
> >
> > Its VERY effective, still... todays stats:
> >
> > SpamAssassin tag hits: (top 100)
> > #1      202469  BAYES_99
>
> 202469 messages incorrectly marked as spam?  out of 10 billion messages
> per day?

Out of 2M today so far.

> (just saying, posting a list of hit rates doesn't say anything about
> the effectiveness of a particular tag ... it's almost meaningless,
> really)

I dont share your feeling. We have good results with bayes and also have a
large test set to test on FP's. We for example do this for the SURBL
project.

But what exactly did you want to add to the discussion ? I dont mind
postings like you did, but it would be nice if you could share your own
results instead of just commenting on other peoples posts. Doesnt help
much.

Could you ? (thanks!)

Bye,
Raymond.

-------------------------- MailScanner list ----------------------
To leave, send    leave mailscanner    to jiscmail at jiscmail.ac.uk
Before posting, please see the Most Asked Questions at
http://www.mailscanner.biz/maq/     and the archives at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/mailscanner.html