Would it not be a better idea to use only 1 junk folder and use another indicator for user identied spam and system identified spam? I think this will be more clear for the user.
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Brian J. Murrell <[email protected]>wrote: > I hope you will indulge this posting to the dev list as it really is > more a dev matter than a using matter. I was going to file a bug about > this but I thought it warranted some discussion first. > > My issue is with how Junk is handled in conjunction with the > markasjunk[2?] plugin(s). > > As you know, with the markasjunk plugin, when you press the junk button > it moves the mail message to the $rcmail_config['junk_mbox'] (i.e. Junk > by default). > > But that does not recognize that there are two types of junk: the mail > that the mail system determined is spam (let's call this tagged spam) > and wants to quarantine for the user to sift through for false > positives[1]. The other type of "Junk" is the spam that the mail system > did not determine for the user (let's call this untagged spam) and that > the user wants to tell the mail system is spam so that it can learn. > > So the user needs two folders for these different types of messages, for > a couple of reasons. First reason is that it's a waste of the users > time to put the untagged spam into the same folder that is meant to be > the folder that the user to sifts through to find falsely tagged spam. > Secondly, the user does need a folder to put untagged spam so that the > mail system has somewhere it can go get messages that the user wants it > to use to learn about what spam is. And this folder shouldn't be same > folder that the tagged spam has gotten put into since we don't want/need > the mail system to learn from messages it's already tagged as spam. > > On my system here those two folders are "Junk" and "spam" > (respectively). Mail that has the X-Spam-Flag header set to "YES" is > put into "Junk" (and does not need to be used to learn about spam from) > and messages that are in the user's INBOX that are actually spam should > be moved to "spam". A process on the mail system goes through the > "spam" folders of all of the users and pushes those messages through the > spam-learning process. > > Am I going about this all wrong? Does anyone else see the need for two > different folders (three if you bring the "ham" into the discussion) for > spam processing? > > Cheers, > b. > > [1] One must have one of these folders lest risk throwing out the > occasional non-spam message without the user's consent/knowledge. This > is where the user goes to look for that message that somebody says they > sent but that the user never received. > > > > > --- 8< --- detachments --- 8< --- > The following attachments have been detached and are available for > viewing. > http://detached.gigo.com/rc/Eq/Uv9TvoDD/signature.asc > Only click these links if you trust the sender, as well as this message. > --- 8< --- detachments --- 8< --- > > > _______________________________________________ > List info: http://lists.roundcube.net/dev/ > BT/0bf96065 > >
_______________________________________________ List info: http://lists.roundcube.net/dev/ BT/8f4f07cd
