From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/57099 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: [Q] why using spam.el ? Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 14:19:57 -0400 Organization: =?koi8-r?q?=F4=C5=CF=C4=CF=D2=20=FA=CC=C1=D4=C1=CE=CF=D7?= @ Cienfuegos Sender: ding-owner@lists.math.uh.edu Message-ID: <4n1xmhgpma.fsf@lifelogs.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1082572510 27575 80.91.224.253 (21 Apr 2004 18:35:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 18:35:10 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: ding-owner+M5639@lists.math.uh.edu Wed Apr 21 20:35:02 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BGMYo-0008F7-00 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 2004 20:35:02 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by malifon.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1BGMYY-0005vm-00; Wed, 21 Apr 2004 13:34:46 -0500 Original-Received: from util2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.23]) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1BGMYQ-0005ve-00 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Wed, 21 Apr 2004 13:34:38 -0500 Original-Received: from justine.libertine.org ([66.139.78.221] ident=postfix) by util2.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1BGMYO-0001Ve-Df for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Wed, 21 Apr 2004 13:34:36 -0500 Original-Received: from clifford.bwh.harvard.edu (clifford.bwh.harvard.edu [134.174.9.41]) by justine.libertine.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 679733A0044 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 2004 13:34:35 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from asimov (asimov [134.174.9.63]) by clifford.bwh.harvard.edu (8.10.2+Sun/8.11.0) with ESMTP id i3LIYY129952 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 2004 14:34:35 -0400 (EDT) Original-To: Gnus Beta Testers X-Face: bd.DQ~'29fIs`T_%O%C\g%6jW)yi[zuz6;d4V0`@y-~$#3P_Ng{@m+e4o<4P'#(_GJQ%TT= D}[Ep*b!\e,fBZ'j_+#"Ps?s2!4H2-Y"sx" Mail-Followup-To: Gnus Beta Testers In-Reply-To: (Didier Verna's message of "Wed, 21 Apr 2004 18:39:28 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) Precedence: bulk Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:57099 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:57099 On Wed, 21 Apr 2004, didier@lrde.epita.fr wrote: > In my own experience, I use spamassassin via procmail (with a very > simple spam detection scheme in gnus making the default (last) > folder of nnmail-split-methods to a group named "spam"). After > bayesian training over 6000 messages (3000 spam, 3000 non spam), my > spamassassin undetected spam rate fell from 200 per day to 1 or 2 > per day. If that's OK with you, then that's great. spam.el supports the setup you describe, by the way. Where people find spam.el most useful is not in detecting spam, but in catching and training on misclassified spam and ham. I'll bet that for you, it's not a simple process to do this. At the very least you can have misclassified spam and ham moved automatically when you exit the summary buffer. Also, spam.el supports many backends, and catches spam in newsgroups. > Currently, the only thing I use in spam.el is the M-d key sequence, > which is a bit overkill ;-) OK, but why do you use it? The spam-mark is not persistent, so it's only good until you exit the group. I'll bet you have something else happen after you set spam-marks (or you'd like to have something else happen). Anyhow, I said the other day that spam.el is a *reactive* package, it responds to what you need. You don't say "now, process all spam." Instead you exit the group summary buffer and things happen automatically. I think that works better, and it's less intrusive. I hope that answers some of your questions. Ted