[Spambayes] Mozilla and summary of bayes calcs

[Tim Peters]

BTW, I'm not a statistician, but I think there's "an obvious" sense in which
Graham's formulation is Bayesian that's been overlooked -- although it's
pretty well hidden <wink>.  I ranted about that earlier:

http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2002-August/028216.html

Two footnotes to that:  (1) In email, Paul later said that the proportion of
ham to spam in his inbox is in fact close to 1 to 1, not the 2 to 1 I had
speculated there.  (2) I very briefly experimented with taking P(spam) and
P(not-spam) into account (based on the training set proportion) as explained
there, but doing so was neither a clear win nor a clear loss, and, at the
time, I was getting big clear wins via other means so just dropped this line
of experimentation.