best practices question

[Michael Elkins]

Ben Rosengart wrote:
> If I understand you correctly, 2, by far.
> 
> For me, a big part of the utility of a bayesian spam filter is that I
> don't have to do the work of figuring out what makes spam identifiable
> as spam.  All I have to do is identify it, and let the software find
> the interesting words.
> 
> Looking at the counts kept by ifile, I see that "border" has appeared
> 26 times in nonspam and 1874 times in spam.  It would normally not
> occur to me to filter on this word.
> 
> I also train the filter on good mail, and I don't see why anyone
> wouldn't, if they're using a private set of word lists.

I agree with this, but I also think it should be configurable.  Right
now I'm using the procmail magic to make this happen automatically.

For summay digest subscription: bogofilter-digest-subscribe at aotto.com