Re: How many people mark spam in gmane groups?

[Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com>]

On Sun, 06 Apr 2003, 4.uce.03.r.s@nurfuerspam.de wrote:
> I don't use spam.el yet (but I'm sure I will in the future, because
> it's certainly a very nice and necessary feature), so I don't know
> how the `*gmane-report-*spam' would fit in there.  As you say that
> it's not trivial, it should be easier to put it in `gnus-sum.el'[1].

Well, the support for read-only backends is not done for spam.el, this
is not a spam reporting issue as much as using spam.el with nntp for
instance.

The way it would work is very simple:

- add a group parameter (global through a regex or specific for that
  group) for the spam-processor.  The spam-processor takes whatever
  messages are marked as spam at summary exit and does something to
  them (for instance, train Bogofilter).

- mark messages as spam in that group

- exit the group - the spam-processor will be automatically invoked

The first one would be done just once, of course.

The problem is that nntp does not split articles like nnmail
backends.  So detecting new articles will be done differently, and
instead of moving them to a spam group as spam.el does now, it would
only mark them as spam.  It would work similarly to adaptive scoring.

As I said, it's a pretty big rewrite for spam.el.  I read Usenet a
lot, though, so it will bother me enough eventually that I'll
implement it.  I have to finish the registry and other new spam.el
features first, though :)

Ted