Hello all, I am trying to come up with a good way to leverage one of our users' extensive knowledge bases but I am not quite sure what the right approach is. All our users share similar mail behavior, but our "power user" gets much more mail traffic than the others.
Currently, I have put everybody in a 'merged group' and our global user was trained with dspam_train from some real corpus. Each user is set to TOE. Accuracy was great for our "power" user, but not quite as good for the other users since our global user does not have that many tokens. I thought it would be a good idea to dspam_merge "power user" to "global user" to improve everybody's accuracy, so I did. However, accuracy -drastically- went down the drain. Very obvious spam is now tagged as innocent with confidence of over 95%. The accuracy rate went from over 99.5% to about 20%. After reviewing the docs, I came to the conclusion that a "Classification Group" would be a good solution: I'd just have to put all our users in the same group, and they would all benefit from the other user's data. However, the documentation about classification groups is a little confusing. This is the behavior I would like (from the docs): "Classification groups allow a group of users to network their results together. If DSPAM is uncertain of whether a message is spam or nonspam for a group member, all other members of the group are queried. If another member believes the message to be spam, it will be marked as spam." Classification, shared and global groups seem (to me) to be confused with each other in the docs. --> My question is, how do I configure a classification group in the "groups" file? According to the docs, the "classification" keyword is used for Global Groups (ie: groupname:classification:*globaluser), but there's no mention of how to configure a "classification group" as I want it (ie: users network their results together) --> I don't want to use a Shared Group because of all the implications it can have if people mishandle some messages. Thank you very much for your consideration. Tony
