from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A5C343F99
	for <jm@localhost>; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 06:30:33 -0400 (EDT)
from phobos [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Wed, 28 Aug 2002 11:30:33 +0100 (IST)
from xent.com ([64.161.22.236]) by dogma.slashnull.org
    (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7SAViZ20088 for <jm@jmason.org>;
    Wed, 28 Aug 2002 11:31:45 +0100
No, hits=-4.7 required=7.0
	tests=KNOWN_MAILING_LIST,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01,USER_AGENT,
	      X_ACCEPT_LANG
	version=2.40-cvs

[Tim]
> One effect of getting rid of MINCOUNT is that it latches on more
> strongly to rare clues now, and those can be unique to the corpus
> trained on (e.g., one trained ham says "gryndlplyx!", and a followup
> new ham quotes it).
This may be a systematic bias in the testing procedure:  in real life, msgs
come ordered in time.  Say there's a thread that spans N messages on c.l.py.
In our testing setup, we'll train on a random sampling throughout its whole
lifetime, and test likewise.  New ham "in the middle" of this thread gets
benefit from that we trained on msgs that appeared both before and *after*
it in real life.  It's quite plausible that the f-p rate would rise without
this effect; in real life, at any given time some number of ham threads will
just be starting their lives, and if they're at all unusual the trained data
will know little to nothing about them.

from localhost (jalapeno [127.0.0.1])
	by jmason.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C267B16F1B
	for <jm@localhost>; Wed,  2 Oct 2002 15:59:09 +0100 (IST)
from jalapeno [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Wed, 02 Oct 2002 15:59:09 +0100 (IST)
from listman.spamassassin.taint.org (listman.spamassassin.taint.org [66.187.233.211]) by
    dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g92EoSK13489 for
    <jm-exmh@jmason.org>; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 15:50:32 +0100
from listman.spamassassin.taint.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by
    listman.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D52F3F9FC; Wed,  2 Oct 2002
    10:51:03 -0400 (EDT)
from int-mx1.corp.spamassassin.taint.org (int-mx1.corp.spamassassin.taint.org
    [172.16.52.254]) by listman.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20E383F997
    for <exmh-workers@listman.redhat.com>; Wed,  2 Oct 2002 10:50:58 -0400
    (EDT)
(from mail@localhost) by int-mx1.corp.spamassassin.taint.org (8.11.6/8.11.6)
    id g92EowP32688 for exmh-workers@listman.redhat.com; Wed, 2 Oct 2002
    10:50:58 -0400
from mx1.spamassassin.taint.org (mx1.spamassassin.taint.org [172.16.48.31]) by
    int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id g92Eovf32684 for
    <exmh-workers@redhat.com>; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 10:50:57 -0400
from dimebox.bmc.com (adsl-66-140-152-233.dsl.hstntx.swbell.net
    [66.140.152.233]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id
    g92EW7i07408 for <exmh-workers@redhat.com>; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 10:32:07 -0400
by dimebox.bmc.com (Postfix, from userid 1205) id 7E38F37EAB;
    Wed,  2 Oct 2002 09:50:56 -0500 (CDT)
from dimebox.bmc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dimebox.bmc.com
    (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FF5737EAA for <exmh-workers@redhat.com>;
    Wed,  2 Oct 2002 09:50:56 -0500 (CDT)
In-reply-to Chris Garrigues <cwg-dated-1033998989.c4b917@DeepEddy.Com>
    message dated "Wed, 02 Oct 2002 08:56:27 -0500."
From exmh-workers-admin@redhat.com  Wed Oct  2 15:59:28 2002