From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jon Snader <jsnader@ix.netcom.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] tactic
Message-ID: <20040401154757.GA96198@ix.netcom.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0403310737130.9002-100000@maxroach.lanl.gov> <001001c417f0$5b952f30$34fea8c0@SOMA> <4227.199.98.20.223.1080832249.squirrel@wish> <020501c417f5$d9622210$34fea8c0@SOMA>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <020501c417f5$d9622210$34fea8c0@SOMA>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Date: Thu,  1 Apr 2004 10:47:57 -0500
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 4c27a638-eacd-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 04:30:14PM +0200, boyd, rounin wrote:
> > >
> > > bayesian doan work.
> > >
> > I've been getting spam that has significant amounts of Dissociated
> > Press-style text after the sales pitch - they're trying to make bayesian
> > filters break.
> 
> yes, i've seen that, hence my comment [above].

They're working fine for me.  The filter adapted to the garbage
salad at the end pretty quickly, and now it routinely drops all
those messages in the spam trap.

jcs