Paul, I'm curious to know if I have explained myself well enough for you to understand my reasoning. I value your (as well as Fritz's, and anyone else's) opinion about this.
Perhaps I am not taking the most appropriate approach for resolving this type of issue - and for that I am open to constructive criticism and suggestions. But until I hear something that is actually constructive, I will continue to believe what I did (and still do) was correct based on the edict, "the ends justify the means" - as it indeed worked to resolve my pollution issue. Micheal Espinola Jr wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> You've lost me there. This is mail being analysed and adding to the >> picture of your particular >> blend of mail. Where is the 'incorrect bolstering' ? If it's mail, >> it gets scored. You can't dictate what ends up in spamdb. > > Some final clarification to illustrate why I consider it 'incorrect > bolstering' - > > The users that cause "pollution" in my corpus frequently send more > email per day than the rest of the company combined, so they are > heavily influencing the balance of the corpus. > > The particular company that this is happening at has approx 65 > employees, with ~5 employees that use their email like Instant > Messaging, and are who I believe the cause of the pollution I have > been referring to. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Assp-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
