[spambayes-dev] A spectacular false positive

[Rob Hooft]

Richie Hindle wrote:
> [Tim]
> 
>>There were about a half dozen strong ham
>>clues that it had come from him, but about 140 spam clues from the variety
>>of little integers, most hapaxes that had appeared in one training spam
>>each.
> 
> 
> Perhaps it's argument for not classifying using hapaxes?  Wait for any
> given clue to appear in more than one message before it becomes valid for
> classification.  Has anyone tried this?  (And not just for SpamBayes -
> Bill?)

Í hävè nöt tríéd ìt, büt Î äm qûìtë sürè ít wöûld pérfòrm wòrsë!

Rob

-- 
Rob W.W. Hooft  ||  rob at hooft.net  ||  http://www.hooft.net/people/rob/