From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/49836 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Niklas Morberg Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: spam-check-BBDB bug?/bbdb whitelist split function Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2003 16:07:56 +0100 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: <4nwukeiy3c.fsf@lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1044457635 12046 80.91.224.249 (5 Feb 2003 15:07:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 15:07:15 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18gR8j-00037T-00 for ; Wed, 05 Feb 2003 16:07:05 +0100 Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu ([129.7.128.10] ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 18gRA4-00024b-00; Wed, 05 Feb 2003 09:08:28 -0600 Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Wed, 05 Feb 2003 09:09:25 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (sclp3.sclp.com [66.230.238.2]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA16977 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2003 09:09:14 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: (qmail 71308 invoked by alias); 5 Feb 2003 15:08:12 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 71303 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2003 15:08:11 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO krynn.axis.se) (212.209.10.216) by 66.230.238.6 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2003 15:08:11 -0000 Original-Received: from PCNIKLAS2 (dh10-13-8-244.axis.se [10.13.8.244]) by krynn.axis.se (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian -4) with ESMTP id h15F7u2q025509 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2003 16:07:56 +0100 Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: <4nwukeiy3c.fsf@lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu> (Ted Zlatanov's message of "Wed, 05 Feb 2003 09:47:03 -0500") Mail-Followup-To: ding@gnus.org User-Agent: Gnus/5.090015 (Oort Gnus v0.15) Emacs/21.2 (i386-mingw-nt5.0.2195) Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:49836 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:49836 Ted Zlatanov writes: > Currently, spam-split will fall through to the next > spam/ham check on a whitelist match. > > I thought of having whitelists return t for a positive ham > match, and then spam-split wouldn't examine the rest of the > spam/ham checks but simply return nil altogether. Does that > makes sense? Given that I understand you correctly: yes! I get some false positives on mail from people who are in my BBDB when I use spam-stat.el. If what you are writing means: turn on BBDB whitelisting and all mail from everybody in your BBDB will be considered ham, then I am all for it. False positives are really really bad because it means I have to sift through my spam group looking for valid emails. But you knew this already. Niklas