Re: [Evolution-hackers] SA rules adjustment

[Radek Doulík <rodo ximian com>]

On Wed, 2004-01-28 at 22:24 +0100, guenther wrote:
> > > 2) Excluding the Habeas headers from Bayes would be good too. Otherwise,
> > > getting more SPAM as HAM with this faked headers will poison the Bayes
> > > database and HAM will get bad Bayes scores.
> > 
> > I am not sure about this. It may cause trouble in case the bayes db is
> > already poisoned. Otherwise it should work OK.
> 
> I'm not sure, if I understand you.
> 
> Excluding this headers means, their existence and the values will
> neither be a sign for SPAM nor HAM. Which this headers definitely are
> ATM, being abused by SPAMmers.

yeah, so it's pretty good sign of spam right now and bayes filter will
profit from it. when it eventually become HAMs again, the filter will
learn that from user (or from us when we turn HABEAS score on again) and
this header will be neutral in bayes db.

Radek