Re: spam.el reporting and moving ham out of spam groups.

[Daniel Pittman <daniel@rimspace.net>]

On 26 May 2004, Adam Sjøgren wrote:
> On Tue, 25 May 2004 23:17:34 +1000, Daniel wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately, it doesn't seem possible to set spam.el to process
>> messages as ham without setting the group classification as 'spam'.
>
> That's right, I think.
>
> I think spam.el would be doing "what-I-mean" more if it ham-processed
> messages marked as ham in unclassified groups in addition to spam
> groups (that is, all non-ham groups).

That is also undesirable to me, since I want to 'train on errors' for
non-spam as well. :)

What I would really like to be able to do is set, on a per-group basis:

1. which (if any) spam learner is run on spam-marked articles.
2. which (if any) ham learner is run on ham-marked articles.
3. just delete the damn spam marked messages.
4. mark some-or-all messages with the spam mark by default

At the moment I can't have a different configuration for 1 and 2, since
only the `spam-process' group parameter is used, and that defines both
the ham and spam learning side of things.

I only want option 4 to turn it off since it isn't useful for a "train
on errors" paradigm. :)

> (If I mark something as ham, I want it ham-processed (unless it is in
> a ham-group, then I've probably marked it by mistake O:-))

...unless there is some explicit ham mark I have missed, "marked as ham"
means "read, killed or scored down", at least by default...

[...]

> I think the jury is still out on whether the change makes sense
> (except to me :-))

It doesn't make sense to me, because this "process all ham" settings
seems to be the *only* difference between an "unclassified" and a "ham"
group.

Unless I have missed something.
       Daniel
-- 
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes.
        -- Henry David Thoreau