Stevan Bajić wrote: > On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 12:03:28 -0400 > Ed Szynaka <szyn...@localnet.com> wrote: > >> I just want to say thanks for this explanation. Much more clear than the >> README. I really feel like I get the point of all the syntax now. >> > I am trying to fix that logic now. Reading the README I see this here: > ---------------------- > groupname:classification:*globaluser > > This will automatically add globaluser as a classification peer to all > users. > Any user who has less than 1000 innocent messages or 250 spam messages in > their corpus, or whose filter is uncertain about a particular message will > consult the global dictionary for an answer. > ---------------------- > > The documentation IMHO is not very clear. > > When is a global group consulted? > > Option A: > [having less than 1000 innocent messages] OR [having less than 250 spam > messages] OR [uncertain result about a particular message] > > > Option B: > ([having less than 1000 innocent messages] AND [having less than 250 spam > messages]) OR [uncertain result about a particular message] > > > The original code in DSPAM is not clear about the logic. It is a total mess. > > I personally would say that A is what should be implemented. What is your > oppinion? > >
I would agree that A is the proper logic based on the README. > >> And just in case there was some misunderstanding; I've got no issues with >> the >> merged group as its implemented, its just not quite what I need. >> >> Thanks, >> Ed >> -- Ed Szynaka Network/Systems Manager LocalNet Corp./CoreComm Internet Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Dspam-user mailing list Dspam-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspam-user
