[Spambayes] Spamvolution

[Tim Peters]

[Charles Cazabon]
> ...
> In this case, I suspect the message was received legitimately and
> simply mis-filed by hand -- human error.

It bears repeating that I believe the error rates I'm seeing now (both of
them) are better than I could do by hand.  This isn't the first misfiling
the system has uncovered in the spam corpus either.

It's also worth mentioning that my chance of dying within the next year is
higher than the chance that my current classifier would deliver a false
positive on c.l.py traffic within the next year (assuming the nature of
c.l.py and spam in my test data is representative of what c.l.py will see
over the next year, and that the volume of c.l.py traffic doesn't
dramatically increase).

> On the plus side, it means Tim can get rid of his most stubborn
> false negative :).

'Fraid not -- that was just the most *mysterious* f-n.  It's all to the
credit of the scheme that this one never went away!  There are others that
have also never gone away, but are such blatant spam that, when you look at
one, you'd swear the system is worthless.