New header token tagging

[michael at optusnet.com.au]

Matthias Andree <matthias.andree at gmx.de> writes:
> David Relson <relson at osagesoftware.com> writes:
> 
> > Question 1:  Has anybody else noticed an effect from the new header
> > tagging?  If so, what have you noticed?
> 
> Yes. Spam detection rate went down big time (read: more false
> negatives); I didn't rebuild the data base though. No false positives;
> train on error and train on some unsures.

That's what I'd expect. You need to rebuild the database
for it to work properly.

(note that the fact that things changes for the worse
when you didn't rebuild the database says that the
header tokens really are important. :)
 
> > Question 2: Have y'all a preference for "h:" vs. "head:"?
> 
> I prefer "h:".
> 
> > Question 3:  Have y'all a preference for what '-H' should do?
> 
> I have a preference to drop 2/3rds of all options that we have. :->

:)
 

Michael.