Re: spam/ham exit processors

[Kai Grossjohann <kai@emptydomain.de>]

Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:

> On Mon, 03 Nov 2003, colman@ppllc.com wrote:
>
>>>From my reading of the manual, it seems that the suggested or
>>>anticipated
>> modus operandi is to move spam in a ham-classified group to a
>> spam-classified group for furthur processing and to move ham from a
>> spam-classified group over to a ham-classified group for furthur
>> processing.  
>
> Nope, you can process the spam at the point of origin or in a central
> group.  Most people like a central "spam" group better.

Oh!  Does this mean that people could set
gnus-spam-process-destinations to nnml:spam, say, then set the
spam-process parameter just on nnml:spam, for it to be added to the
blacklist or whatever?  (Whereas spam-process remains unset/nil in all
other groups except nnml:spam?)

Fascinating.