[Spambayes] More back-patting - my brain's first FP where bayes got it right

[Toby Dickenson]

On Monday 18 November 2002 11:29 pm, Tim Peters wrote:

> BTW, I gave up on my mistake-driven classifier experiment.  I kept gett=
ing
> several porn spam as Unsure every day, and got tired of digging thru it=
.
> Now I'm training on each spam that doesn't score 100, and each ham that
> doesn't score 0.  Amazingly, that's added a hell of a lot more spam tha=
n
> ham to the training data -- now up to 99 ham and 149 spam.  Porn spam n=
o
> longer rates as Unsure, and I'm happier.  Perhaps that's just due to th=
e
> drop in forced stimulation, though <wink>.

Why exclude spams that score 100 from training?  Even these really spammy 
spams might contain clues that would help to classify other more marginal 
spam.