49 lines
1.7 KiB
Plaintext
49 lines
1.7 KiB
Plaintext
Return-Path: bkc@murkworks.com
|
|
Delivery-Date: Fri Sep 6 16:02:11 2002
|
|
From: bkc@murkworks.com (Brad Clements)
|
|
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2002 11:02:11 -0400
|
|
Subject: [Spambayes] Deployment
|
|
In-Reply-To: <200209061443.g86EhXQ14543@pcp02138704pcs.reston01.va.comcast.net>
|
|
References: Your message of "Fri, 06 Sep 2002 10:39:48 EDT."
|
|
<3D788653.9143.1D8992DA@localhost>
|
|
Message-ID: <3D788B92.22739.1D9E0FD1@localhost>
|
|
|
|
Did you want this on the list? I'm replying to the list..
|
|
|
|
On 6 Sep 2002 at 10:43, Guido van Rossum wrote:
|
|
|
|
> What's an auto-ham?
|
|
|
|
Automatically marking something as ham after a given timeout.. regardless of how long
|
|
that timeout is, someone is going to forget to submit the message back as spam.
|
|
|
|
How many spams-as-hams can be accepted before the f-n rate gets unacceptable?
|
|
|
|
|
|
> > How about adding an IMAP server with a spam and deleted-ham
|
|
> > folder. Most email clients can handle IMAP. Users should be able to
|
|
> > quickly move "spam" into the spam folder.
|
|
>
|
|
> I personally don't think IMAP has a bright future, but for people who
|
|
> do use it, that's certainly a good approach.
|
|
>
|
|
> > Instead of deleting messages (or, by reprogramming the delete
|
|
> > function) they can quickly move ham into the ham folder.
|
|
>
|
|
> Yes.
|
|
|
|
I view IMAP as a stop-gap measure until tighter integration with various email clients
|
|
can be achieved.
|
|
|
|
I still feel it's better to require classification feedback from the recipient, rather than
|
|
make any assumptions after some period of time passes. But this is an end-user issue
|
|
and we're still at the algorithm stage.. ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brad Clements, bkc@murkworks.com (315)268-1000
|
|
http://www.murkworks.com (315)268-9812 Fax
|
|
AOL-IM: BKClements
|
|
|