a short introduction to Gnus vs. Spam with spam.el

a short introduction to Gnus vs. Spam with spam.el

[Ted Zlatanov]

At http://lifelogs.com/spam/ I have put up a brief introduction to the
benefits and features of spam.el.  I think it will help people
interested in using it, or deciding whether to use it.  There are
screenshots, diagrams, and a summary of the functionality that's as
brief as I could make it.

Feel free to send me feedback, I'd like the document to become a
standard introduction, and I'll keep it synchronized with the changes
in spam.el as they occur.

Thanks
Ted

Re: a short introduction to Gnus vs. Spam with spam.el

[Derrell.Lipman]

Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:

> At http://lifelogs.com/spam/ 
> ...
> Feel free to send me feedback,

Nice!

Just a few comments:

- The diagram in the introduction shows Spam and Ham going into the MTA, but
  the Concepts section defines Spam and Ham as distinct from "undetermined
  messages"  Shouldn't the diagram really show just "Undetermined Messages"
  (possibly with Spam/Ham in parenthesis or something)?

- Concepts should include a definition of "undetermined messages"

- In Spliting Incoming Mail, spam-use-ifile says that the user has a choice of
  using ifile for all classification or using it only for spam, but there's no
  indication (at least not in this section) of how to specify that choice.

- While reading this, I'm asking myself why I can't use multiple spam
  splitters and processors.  Is there some reason not to use bogofilter and
  blacklist, for example?  It seems from the early text, that the user must
  choose one.  The later screen shots indicate that multiple processors may be
  checked.

- 'H' as a spam mark seems counter-intuitive when the opposite is Ham.  (I
  realize that 'S' isn't available, but this is worth some consideration.)

I'm waiting until I upgrade to a newer Oort before using spam.el (I'm
currently still running 0.06) but I'm sure looking forward to it!

Cheers,

Derrell

Re: a short introduction to Gnus vs. Spam with spam.el

[Andreas Fuchs]

Today, Derrell Lipman <Derrell.Lipman@unwireduniverse.com> wrote:
> - 'H' as a spam mark seems counter-intuitive when the opposite is Ham.
>   (I realize that 'S' isn't available, but this is worth some
>   consideration.)

'$'?

-- 
Andreas Fuchs, <asf@acm.org>, asf@jabber.at, antifuchs

Re: a short introduction to Gnus vs. Spam with spam.el

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Andreas Fuchs <asf@void.at> writes:

>> - 'H' as a spam mark seems counter-intuitive when the opposite is Ham.
>>   (I realize that 'S' isn't available, but this is worth some
>>   consideration.)
>
> '$'?

Heh.  "$pam".

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen

Re: a short introduction to Gnus vs. Spam with spam.el

[Andreas Fuchs]

Today, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> wrote:
>>> - 'H' as a spam mark seems counter-intuitive when the opposite is
>>>   Ham.  (I realize that 'S' isn't available, but this is worth some
>>>   consideration.)
>>
>> '$'?
> 
> Heh.  "$pam".

Make

$
$
$

fast! (-:


-- 
Andreas Fuchs, <asf@acm.org>, asf@jabber.at, antifuchs

Re: a short introduction to Gnus vs. Spam with spam.el

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, Derrell.Lipman@UnwiredUniverse.com wrote:
> Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:
> 
>> At http://lifelogs.com/spam/ 

> Just a few comments:
> 
> - The diagram in the introduction shows Spam and Ham going into the
>   MTA, but the Concepts section defines Spam and Ham as distinct
>   from "undetermined messages" Shouldn't the diagram really show
>   just "Undetermined Messages" (possibly with Spam/Ham in
>   parenthesis or something)?

Messages are never "undetermined" except as far as Gnus is concerned,
that's what I was trying to show.  Mail is always either spam or ham
(but one man's spam is another's ham :)

> - In Spliting Incoming Mail, spam-use-ifile says that the user has a
>   choice of using ifile for all classification or using it only for
>   spam, but there's no indication (at least not in this section) of
>   how to specify that choice.

I would prefer to leave such details for the Gnus manual.  The
presentation is meant to be an introduction, so I'd like to keep it
brief and focused on explaining to new users why they want Gnus +
spam.el.

> - While reading this, I'm asking myself why I can't use multiple
>   spam splitters and processors.  Is there some reason not to use
>   bogofilter and blacklist, for example?  It seems from the early
>   text, that the user must choose one.  The later screen shots
>   indicate that multiple processors may be checked.

The answer is yes and no.  It wouldn't make sense to use ifile and
bogofilter together, for instance.  Also, ifile won't coexist well
with the other splitters if it is used to split into all folders, not
just spam/non-spam.  I didn't want to bring up those issues in the
presentation.

> - 'H' as a spam mark seems counter-intuitive when the opposite is
>   Ham.  (I realize that 'S' isn't available, but this is worth some
>   consideration.)

I know, I know.  Fortunately it's just a character, and can be
customized.  I tried hard to eliminate direct dependence on the 'H'
character in spam.el, but it could be a problem depending on how Gnus
stores old marks, and whether there's any other code that doesn't use
the spam-mark as a symbol but directly as a character value.  I would
assume that won't be a problem.

So, the question is: what should the new "spam" mark be?  "$" seems an
obvious choice; I personally don't like the way it looks in the
summary buffer with a monospaced font but that's hardly crucial.
Also, "$" is not as meaningful in countries that don't use dollars.  I
would love to use an extended Unicode character, but that will annoy
everyone.  So maybe "@" would be good?  What do you (the spam.el
current and potential users) think?

Ted

Re: a short introduction to Gnus vs. Spam with spam.el

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:

> So, the question is: what should the new "spam" mark be?  "$" seems an
> obvious choice; I personally don't like the way it looks in the
> summary buffer with a monospaced font but that's hardly crucial.
> Also, "$" is not as meaningful in countries that don't use dollars.

But it kinda looks like an "S", which stands for "$PAM".

> I would love to use an extended Unicode character, but that will
> annoy everyone.  So maybe "@" would be good?  What do you (the
> spam.el current and potential users) think?

The `@' command is in use in the Agent, so that could be confusing... 

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen

Re: a short introduction to Gnus vs. Spam with spam.el

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, larsi@gnus.org wrote:
> Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:
> 
>> So, the question is: what should the new "spam" mark be?  "$" seems
>> an obvious choice; I personally don't like the way it looks in the
>> summary buffer with a monospaced font but that's hardly crucial.
>> Also, "$" is not as meaningful in countries that don't use dollars.
> 
> But it kinda looks like an "S", which stands for "$PAM".

I'm OK with it.  Any protests?  Other nominations?

Ted

Re: a short introduction to Gnus vs. Spam with spam.el

[Raja R Harinath]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:
>
>> So, the question is: what should the new "spam" mark be?  "$" seems an
>> obvious choice; I personally don't like the way it looks in the
>> summary buffer with a monospaced font but that's hardly crucial.
>> Also, "$" is not as meaningful in countries that don't use dollars.
>
> But it kinda looks like an "S", which stands for "$PAM".

If you squint at it, it looks like an "S" that is striked-out -- which
is pretty much what we want to do with 'S'pam.

- Hari
-- 
Raja R Harinath ------------------------------ harinath@cs.umn.edu

Re: a short introduction to Gnus vs. Spam with spam.el

[Ted Zlatanov]

The spam-mark is now `$'.  Let's see how that works for everyone.

Thanks
Ted

Please help me unsubscribe

[smarks]

Hi,

I have tried several of the usual methods to no avail so I was hoping
someone wouldn't mind telling me how to unsubscribe from this list.

Thanks.

Re: a short introduction to Gnus vs. Spam with spam.el

[Danny Siu]

i like that better than the old mark.  $ certainly looks more spam'ish.

Ted Zlatanov writes:

  Ted> The spam-mark is now `$'.  Let's see how that works for everyone.
  Ted> Thanks Ted



-- 
Danny Siu