Re: `S t' always returns nil

[Christopher Splinter <chris@splinter.inka.de>]

Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:

> 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?

As bogofilter allows the user to use RF (Robinson-Fisher) as a
binary filter too, that's somewhat redundant. Another reason why
this wouldn't be too useful is the RF algorithm itself, which
yields extreme results for messages which are easy to classify,
but rather undifferentiated ones for 'unsure' messages.

If it's arduous to support non-binary algorithms properly, I
wouldn't support them at all and go for the first option.