Return-Path: tim.one@comcast.net Delivery-Date: Thu Sep 12 01:44:56 2002 From: tim.one@comcast.net (Tim Peters) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 20:44:56 -0400 Subject: [Spambayes] XTreme Training In-Reply-To: <20020911122308.GB5866@cthulhu.gerg.ca> Message-ID: [Tim] >> Why would spam be likely to end up with two instances of Return-Path >> in the headers? [Greg Ward] > Possibly another qmail-ism from Bruce Guenter's spam collection. Doesn't seem *likely*, as it appeared in about 900 of about 14,000 spams. It could be specific to one of his bait addresses, though -- don't know. A nice thing about a statistical inferencer is that you really don't have to know why a thing works, just whether it works . > Or maybe Anthony's right about spammers being stupid and blindly copying > headers. (Well, of course he's right about spammers being stupid; it's > just this particular aspect of stupidity that's open to question.) I'm going to blow it off -- it's just another instance of being pointlessly baffled by a mixed corpus half of which I don't know enough about.