Baysen plugin effectiveness

Larry Wng Master Posts: 169 Points: 152 Rating: 6 Authority: 6 Joined: 04 January 2006	#1 0 06 January 2006 17:03:35 I've been using K9 on my previous email client and am wondering how effective the Bat anti-spam plugin is. I've been running around 98% on K9. Is the plugin as good after training or should I stick with K9? Thanks, Larry

Roelof Otten Guru Posts: 2963 Points: 5336 Rating: 60 Authority: 60 Joined: 19 September 2004	#2 0 07 January 2006 06:23:51 Last month on a flow of about 15000 messages with almost 1000 spam mails it missed 10% of my spam. It didn't have any false positives. __________________________________ I'm just a user of The Bat! I don't work for Ritlabs.

Larry Wng Master Posts: 169 Points: 152 Rating: 6 Authority: 6 Joined: 04 January 2006	#3 0 09 January 2006 20:28:26 Thanks. I see that there are 3 anti-spam plugins. Is one any more effective or offer more features than the others? I've been using the Bayes Filter Plugin v2.0. It appears to be working ok (haven't used it for too long though). Any thoughts? Larry

Marck Pearlstone Guru Posts: 317 Points: 570 Rating: 6 Authority: 6 Joined: 17 September 2004	#4 0 10 January 2006 02:30:59 When I was using spam filters, I used the Bayes Filter plugin for a long while. Later, for beta testing purposes, I switch to the BayesIt. Both worked well for me up to a point, but I have some strange cross-over mails that are not spam but sure look like it! Training either system to ignore these messages spoiled the trapping system and it all fell apart. I now use spamassassin on my mail server and no local plugins. (shrug) iviarck