spam cutoff less than neutral?

[Boris 'pi' Piwinger]

Tom Anderson wrote:

> However, since 0.5 should theoretically be "unsure",

I don't subscribe to this point of view. I am not claiming
you can move this barrier to anything you want, but you can
pretty much do it to anything reasonable by training. I
personally do use .5 as a cutoff (which means, messages with
it are marked as spam).

> I'm hesitant
> to move the spam_cutoff much further due to the philosophical
> implications.  This is particularly true if I move spam_cutoff too close
> to robx. 

I have that almost the same (I could probably make it
strictly the same, they differ by .001.

> False positives are unacceptable, and heretofore unseen emails
> need the benefit of the doubt.  Already my spam_cutoff is less than
> min_dev, which itself seems somewhat hypocritical.

I don't understand that.

> Should I keep my spam_cutoff as is and just continue correcting
> unsures?  Or is it safe to move it into "unsure" territory? 

Nothing is safe except for TANSTAAFL.

> Does anyone
> else have a very low spam_cutoff?  Does it produce any false positives? 

I have messages *I* cannot decide.

pi