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: <LNBBLJKPBEHFEDALKOLCAEJEBDAB.tim.one@comcast.net>

[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 <wink>.

> 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.

