From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/49678 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: `S t' always returns nil Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 15:17:49 -0500 Organization: =?koi8-r?q?=F4=C5=CF=C4=CF=D2=20=FA=CC=C1=D4=C1=CE=CF=D7?= @ Cienfuegos Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: <4n7kcqtkia.fsf@lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu> References: <87d6mjsz41.fsf@splinter.inka.de> <4nd6micwhv.fsf@lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu> <87bs224dsw.fsf@splinter.inka.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1043698731 25832 80.91.224.249 (27 Jan 2003 20:18:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 20:18:51 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ding@gnus.org Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18dFiL-0006hE-00 for ; Mon, 27 Jan 2003 21:18:42 +0100 Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu ([129.7.128.10] ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 18dFhr-0006Lg-00; Mon, 27 Jan 2003 14:18:11 -0600 Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Mon, 27 Jan 2003 14:19:09 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (sclp3.sclp.com [66.230.238.2]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA13894 for ; Mon, 27 Jan 2003 14:18:55 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: (qmail 8120 invoked by alias); 27 Jan 2003 20:17:52 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 8115 invoked from network); 27 Jan 2003 20:17:52 -0000 Original-Received: from clifford.bwh.harvard.edu (134.174.9.41) by 66.230.238.6 with SMTP; 27 Jan 2003 20:17:52 -0000 Original-Received: from lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu (lockgroove [134.174.9.133]) by clifford.bwh.harvard.edu (8.10.2+Sun/8.11.0) with ESMTP id h0RKHpW16917; Mon, 27 Jan 2003 15:17:51 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (from tzz@localhost) by lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.0) id h0RKHnw27212; Mon, 27 Jan 2003 15:17:49 -0500 (EST) Original-To: Christopher Splinter 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: Christopher Splinter , ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: <87bs224dsw.fsf@splinter.inka.de> (Christopher Splinter's message of "Mon, 27 Jan 2003 20:01:51 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.090015 (Oort Gnus v0.15) Emacs/21.2 (sparc-sun-solaris2.8) Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:49678 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:49678 On Mon, 27 Jan 2003, chris@splinter.inka.de wrote: > You still get this output (at least by default) using the > Robinson or the Graham algorithm. The newer Robinson-Fisher > though, which has three possible return values, can return > 'Spam', 'Ham' or 'Unsure'. OK, so "Spam" and "Yes" are both positive spam indicators. I've added that to spam.el. >> Fixing this is trivial, but should I match on something else, or >> should I allow both ^Yes and ^Spam as valid spam indicators in the >> header? > > Since the indicators are configurable, it might be advisable to > allow the user to tell Gnus what to match on. Done, another long variable comes into existence! spam-bogofilter-bogosity-positive-spam-header is a regexp. The default allows for "Yes" and "Spam." > There's one thing to be decided if Robinson-Fisher is integrated > into spam.el, though: What should be done with the 'unsure' > messages? Should they be moved to a separate group? I want spam.el to remain binary (spam vs. ham). Introducing a third category would complicate things enormously. ifile is the only multi-way classifier in a limited way, and I'm not sure that's too useful. We should have three ways of dealing with 'Unsure' messages: - treat them as ham (the case now) - let the user decide if they are to be ham or spam (why would the user ever want unsure messages as spam, though?) - use the spamicity score for 'Unsure' messages, cutoff decided by the user I think the third option is best, what do you think? Ted