RE: Spam with no purpose?

["Michel Py" <michel () arneill-py sacramento ca us>]

> > Michel Py wrote:
> > Indeed; notice I did write "Bayesian-like" and not "Bayesian" and
> > never mentioned anything about good ones or not-as-good ones.

> Paul Jakma wrote:
> Right, but if we're going to talk about bayesian filtering
> in general, there's little sense in constraining the
> discussion to "not-as-good" bayesian filters. The not-as-good
> filters are obviously doomed to extinction, if they do not
> improve and become good ones.

Paul,

I hope you forgive my bluntness, but this is the worst argument you have
ever made in the hundreds of postings I had the privilege to exchange
with you on other mailing lists over the years.

Especially on _this_ mailing list, if you were right, Microsoft would be
extinct.

Michel.