Any other thoughts on this? I got another 5-6 spams this morning that were
scored 0 by Bayes. It's dragging down the hits from other rules!

omehegan wrote:
> I'm running SA 3.2.1 with Postfix, routing mail to it through spamd/spamc.
> I have a site-wide Bayesian database that I trained some time ago with a
> few hundred hams, and then since then I've trained spam into it anytime I
> received a false negative. With the recent influx of PDF and stock spam,
> I've been updating rules and tweaking settings to get SA to catch them. I
> noticed something interesting - all the spam I've gotten in at least the
> last few days has scored 0 on Bayes. That's causing SA to drop the
> message's score by 2.6 points, throwing other filters off-balance, so to
> speak. I'm wondering if this is happening because I've been dutifully
> teaching these stock spam messages into the database. They're full of
> nonsense words, and although I think I've been told on this list that it's
> ok to submit them, it seems like that could reduce the Bayes reliability.
> Or, maybe I just need to refresh the database with a slew of new ham
> messages.
> Attached is a spam I got today, which got good hits in other tests but 0
> probability in Bayes. Any suggestions on how to remedy this would be
> appreciated. Thanks!
> spam.txt

View this message in context:
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at