>>> "ESF" == Eric S Fraga writes: > On Thursday, 3 Feb 2022 at 07:26, dick wrote: >> You'd be the first person or bot I've heard say this. > I've never been called a bot before. :-) >> From Gnus Manual Section 8.6 "Initial impressions seem to indicate that >> it's [i.e., adaptive scoring] totally useless as it stands." >> >> Like most Gnus things, scoring is a bear to configure, but worse, its >> default bag-of-words approach would get it wrong most of the time. > Well, it works for me. Yes, I spent some time getting the weights right > for the various actions used for scoring but, at the very least, it does > sort my emails in order of decreasing relevance/importance most of the > time. And it does a good job of automatically marking as read emails > that I am seldom going to read. > Also works well for some of the newsgroups (e.g. emacs.help and > emacs.devel) and some rss feeds (arxiv). > For the record, my settings are: > #+begin_src emacs-lisp > (setq gnus-default-adaptive-score-alist > '(;(gnus-kill-file-mark) > ;;(gnus-unread-mark) > ;; (gnus-read-mark (from 5) (subject 30)) > (gnus-replied-mark (from 50) (subject 10)) > (gnus-read-mark (from 30) (subject 10)) > (gnus-cached-mark (from 30) (subject 10)) > (gnus-forwarded-mark (from 10) (subject 5)) > (gnus-saved-mark (from 10) (subject 5)) > (gnus-expirable-mark (from 0) (subject 0)) > (gnus-catchup-mark (from -5) (subject -30)) > (gnus-killed-mark (subject -100)) > (gnus-del-mark (from -10) (subject -50))) > gnus-default-adaptive-word-score-alist '((42 . 3) ;cached > (65 . 2) ;replied > (70 . 1) ;forwarded > (82 . 1) ;read > (67 . -1) ;catchup > (69 . 0) ;expired > (75 . -3) ;killed > (114 . -3)) ;deleted > ) > #+end_src Thanks for sharing, this is an issue that is in my heads for years but I never took the time to look into it further. However more and more I feel I need it. Right now I work with registries and mark threads as IMPORTANT, TODO, DONE etc, but it is not that useful as I expected, mainly because you cannot restrict the summary buffer to registries (a bug we discovered some weeks ago). So may this is a way to go > and I've been using these now for a few years. > I should add that I do have some fixed scores as well so, for instance, > emails to me from the PhD students I supervise always score high no > matter what the subject is. That is to say you score according to their email address? I am extremely interested in such a configuration, since I right now need it. Would you mind sharing (off list if necessary) Thanks Uwe