From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id WAA28329; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:19:21 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id WAA28594 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:19:20 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from outbound28-2.lax.untd.com (outbound28-2.lax.untd.com [64.136.28.160]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i7BKJIRM011099 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:19:19 +0200 Received: from outbound28-2.lax.untd.com (smtp04.lax.untd.com [10.130.24.124]) by smtpout01.lax.untd.com with SMTP id AABATW936AZ3MQ5S for (sender ); Wed, 11 Aug 2004 13:19:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 7424 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2004 20:18:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO vangogh) (66.52.232.23) by smtp04.lax.untd.com with SMTP; 11 Aug 2004 20:18:32 -0000 From: "Brandon J. Van Every" To: "caml" Subject: RE: [Caml-list] Who controls INRIA mailserv filters? Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 13:29:11 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-ContentStamp: 10:5:3902449443 X-UNTD-OriginStamp: CI84cOLHFqh7Zd2QWkwvEFvwyO3T/pIsFsCrOjjLH87FdalQ4xzR7LHWkmBBi8a4 X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 411A7F46.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; brandon:99 caml-list:01 posts:01 posts:01 bayesian:01 bayesian:01 caml-list:01 crap:01 crap:01 unboxed:01 bigarray:01 olivier:02 business:96 overhead:03 wrote:03 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Diego Olivier wrote: > > My advice : make you posts more technical. What's getting filtered are announces of ML S*attle, which is legitimate traffic. That means it contains some secret problem word I don't know about. Once I started using my anti-bayesian signature, all my other posts have been getting through just fine. Also do you really believe this bayesian filter retrains if I exercise "good behavior?" I don't; I think it's dumb as bricks. In any event I don't care about your personal tastes as to what constitutes "good behavior." When I look back over my posts, I see sufficient technical content. You may not like business or organizational issues, or the kinds of theatrics they can precipitate, but that's the growing pains of any language. You show me a serious caml-biz list, and I will take the traffic there. Until then, you're stuck with me here. The point of a bayesian filter is to eliminate naykid laydees and whatnot, not censor as a pseudo-moderator. I hope nobody ever arrives at the world view that this postblocking nonsense I'm experiencing is a legitimate judgement of content. That would be a sad day for diversity of opinion, or frankly, for human intelligence. And with that, I recite the liturgy: Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com Brand*n Van Every S*attle, WA Praise Be to the caml-list Bayesian filter! It blesseth my postings, it is evil crap! evil crap! Bigarray! Unboxed overhead group! Wondering! chant chant chant... ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners