scoring vs. killing

scoring vs. killing

[David Abrahams]

Hi,

I tried to make some guy's troll-ish messages disappear by lowering
the score of articles he authored using `L a f p', since my message
buffer is normally not showing read articles and the default is to
mark articles with a score lower than zero as read.  However, the
effect I got was that his undownloaded articles appear italicized with
a "Y" in the marks column.  That appears to be a "marked read because
of too low a score" mark, but the article is still visible :(

I then resorted to the kill file solution and his articles
disappeared.  Hooray!

However, I hear kill files aren't really a good way to do this.  How
do I use scoring to avoid endless distraction with articles I
shouldn't read?

Thanks in advance,
Dave

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com

Re: scoring vs. killing

[Sacha Chua]

David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:

> I tried to make some guy's troll-ish messages disappear by lowering
> the score of articles he authored using `L a f p', since my message
> buffer is normally not showing read articles and the default is to

The gnus info manual has this under the "Scoring Variables" node:

`gnus-summary-expunge-below'
     Don't display the summary lines of articles that have scores lower
     than this variable.  This is `nil' by default, which means that no
     articles will be hidden.  This variable is local to the summary
     buffers, and has to be set from `gnus-summary-mode-hook'.

Hope that helps!
-- 
Sacha Chua <sacha@free.net.ph> - Ateneo CS faculty geekette
interests: emacs, gnu/linux, wearables, teaching compsci
http://sacha.free.net.ph/

Re: scoring vs. killing

[Jesper Harder]

David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:

> How do I use scoring to avoid endless distraction with articles I
> shouldn't read?

You probably want to set `gnus-summary-expunge-below' to an
appropriate value.

Re: scoring vs. killing

[David Abrahams]

Jesper Harder <harder@ifa.au.dk> writes:

> David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:
>
>> How do I use scoring to avoid endless distraction with articles I
>> shouldn't read?
>
> You probably want to set `gnus-summary-expunge-below' to an
> appropriate value.

I can't find a good definition for "expunge", but if it means what I
think it does in my nnimap groups, I don't want it.  The idea is
simply to *hide* the messages, not to remove them from the server.
Is there a way to achieve that?

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com

Re: scoring vs. killing

[Jesper Harder]

David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:

> I can't find a good definition for "expunge", but if it means what I
> think it does in my nnimap groups, I don't want it.

Hmm, I guess the meaning of "expunge" in nnimap is inconsistent with
the meaning elsewhere in Gnus.

I don't use IMAP, but as far as I can tell the two different uses
don't mean the same at all.

> The idea is simply to *hide* the messages, not to remove them from
> the server.  Is there a way to achieve that?

Yup, that's what `gnus-summary-expunge-below' does.

Re: scoring vs. killing

[Michael Shields]

In message <m3sml2ivj7.fsf@defun.localdomain>,
Jesper Harder <harder@ifa.au.dk> wrote:
> Hmm, I guess the meaning of "expunge" in nnimap is inconsistent with
> the meaning elsewhere in Gnus.
>
> I don't use IMAP, but as far as I can tell the two different uses
> don't mean the same at all.

They are different because "expunge" has a specific meaning in IMAP,
not the same as its meaning in Gnus.  Unfortunately neither would be
easy to change now.
-- 
Shields.

Re: scoring vs. killing

[David Abrahams]

Michael Shields <shields@msrl.com> writes:

> In message <m3sml2ivj7.fsf@defun.localdomain>,
> Jesper Harder <harder@ifa.au.dk> wrote:
>> Hmm, I guess the meaning of "expunge" in nnimap is inconsistent with
>> the meaning elsewhere in Gnus.
>>
>> I don't use IMAP, but as far as I can tell the two different uses
>> don't mean the same at all.
>
> They are different because "expunge" has a specific meaning in IMAP,
> not the same as its meaning in Gnus.  Unfortunately neither would be
> easy to change now.

I guess I'm still confused.  gnus-summary-expunge-below is a Gnus
feature.  If I set it in my nnimap group so that some messages are
expunged, will they be removed from the server or merely hidden?  If
they will be removed from the server, how do I cause them to be
merely hidden?

Thanks,
-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com

Re: scoring vs. killing

[Reiner Steib]

On Thu, Nov 06 2003, David Abrahams wrote:

> Michael Shields <shields@msrl.com> writes:
>> They are different because "expunge" has a specific meaning in IMAP,
>> not the same as its meaning in Gnus.  Unfortunately neither would be
>> easy to change now.

Maybe we could change "expunge" to "hide" (in No Gnus).  Or is there a
better similar word?  Suggestions from native speakers?

> I guess I'm still confused.  gnus-summary-expunge-below is a Gnus
> feature.  If I set it in my nnimap group so that some messages are
> expunged, will they be removed from the server or merely hidden?  

Hidden.  See Jesper's answer before.

Bye, Reiner.
-- 
       ,,,
      (o o)
---ooO-(_)-Ooo--- PGP key available via WWW   http://rsteib.home.pages.de/

Re: scoring vs. killing

[Jesper Harder]

Reiner Steib <4.uce.03.r.s@nurfuerspam.de> writes:

> On Thu, Nov 06 2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>
>> Michael Shields <shields@msrl.com> writes:
>>> They are different because "expunge" has a specific meaning in IMAP,
>>> not the same as its meaning in Gnus.  Unfortunately neither would be
>>> easy to change now.
>
> Maybe we could change "expunge" to "hide" (in No Gnus).  

I think "hide" is clearer.  Maybe it would make sense to postpone
renaming until all the Emacs versions we support have `defvaralias',
which would make the transition more painless (that may take a long
time, though).

Re: scoring vs. killing

[Michael Shields]

In message <v965hxokri.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de>,
Reiner Steib <4.uce.03.r.s@nurfuerspam.de> wrote:
> Maybe we could change "expunge" to "hide" (in No Gnus).  Or is there a
> better similar word?  Suggestions from native speakers?

"Hide" definitely sounds better to me.  I suppose we could keep stubs
of the old function names, so maybe it's not as hard to change as I
had been thinking.

The Oxford English Dictionary says:

    expunge, v. 1. trans. To strike out, blot out, erase, omit (a name
    or word from a list, a phrase or passage from a book or record).
    2. fig. To wipe out, efface, annihilate, annul, destroy, put an
    end to.

I'm a native speaker in the US, and my experience is that most use of
"expunge" implies that it is permanent and removes all traces.  That
accurately describes the IMAP EXPUNGE command.

Gnus already uses the word "hide" for temporarily concealing
uninteresting article parts, thread trees in the summary buffer, and
topics in the group buffer.
-- 
Shields.

Re: scoring vs. killing

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Thu, 06 Nov 2003, 4.uce.03.r.s@nurfuerspam.de wrote:

> Maybe we could change "expunge" to "hide" (in No Gnus).  Or is there
> a better similar word?  Suggestions from native speakers?

I think 'hide' is fine, but here's some synonyms that may work in the
context of gnus-VERB-below:

conceal, obscure, purge, do-not-display, do-not-display-with-score,
no-display, drop-from-summary.

I also dislike "expunge" in that context.

Ted