[lug] More Spam Please?

[The Matt]

On Mon, 2003-06-02 at 12:39, Kenneth D. Weinert wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 12:25:23PM -0600, The Matt wrote:
> > OK folks, this is perhaps the stupidest question I've ever posed (and I
> > post on a.r.k), but it has a purpose.  Is there a good, reversible way
> > to get more spam?
<snip>
> 
> 	I do wonder about not using a spam collection though - what
> makes you unique from the rest of us that you're afraid you'd
> misclassify some incoming mail if SA was trained from it? Odd friends
> (well, you do talk with us :) or are you afraid you'd miss the "Grow
> Your Antenna To ENORMOUS lengths with our Herbal Concoction!   wx8347"
> messages?

No.  The main reason is that I get quite a few large HTML messages that
SA *really wants* to make spam.  They are daily/weekly newsletters and
comics mails that have all the right words to hammer SA.  The one thing
I might do is make a copy of a Spam collection and hand prune it.  The
obvious spam is OK, it's that stuff right at the edge that could kill
the filter.  I'd like to see how well the Bayes handles this.

Of course, the approx. 200 or so good HTML mails I'll send SA as time
goes on should teach it. :)

Mat
-- 
"And isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony, anyway?  I mean,
all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good
and crazy, ooh ooh ooh, the sky's the limit!" -- The Tick
  The Matt -- http://ucsub.colorado.edu/~thompsma/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/pipermail/lug/attachments/20030602/d98ee064/attachment.pgp>