spamassassin-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steve Bergman <>
Subject Re: Bayes, Manual and Auto Learning Strategies
Date Wed, 02 Jul 2014 01:36:13 GMT

On 07/01/2014 07:32 PM, Karsten Br├Ąckelmann wrote:
> That's pretty bad practice. Fundamentally, you are implementing a custom
> auto-learn flavor, overruling the SA configurable auto-learn behavior

SA's autolearn behavior doesn't make much sense. I have no confidence in it.

This method shields the user from the worst of the spam, while giving 
them full control of what gets relearned as spam.

> and ignoring all safety concepts implemented by SA.

What safety concepts? autolearn is a complete joke. Even the docs 
explain that it's only there as a last resort method of kinda sorta 
training the spam filter.

> So if a user in a hurry simply deletes some spam, it will remain ham, as
> far as Bayes is concerned.

Same as with Thunderbird, I think. And it's working very well for them. 
If they act irresponsibly, they'll get more spam. It takes no longer to 
highlight the spam and click "Junk" than it does to highlight the spam 
and click "Delete".

I've pretty much decided at this point that if the users don't do what I 
tell them to do, repeatedly, then what results is not my responsibility.

And it's not.

The alternative is to not mark incoming mail as ham, and allow the SA 
Bayesian filter to remain inactive forever.

I opted to give the users the choice of being responsible for sorting, 
and reaping the benefits of that if they do. And yes, I know that some 
are not going to.

I'd be interested if you have a better solution in mind.


View raw message