On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 19:27 +1100, Rod Butcher wrote: > Hans wrote: > > On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 18:37 +1100, Rod Butcher wrote: > > > > Ok, but still, won't marking "new" messages as not-Junk also make SA do > > the analysis? > I'm not 100% sure. But remember, filters err on the side of caution - if > it's not sure it won't flag it as junk. Hence telling it something isn't > junk when it already has decided it isn't is unlikely to teach it much, > if anything you're just confirming what it already believes. > On the other hand, telling it something is junk when it has not yet > decided it is, or telling it someting isn't when it thinks it is, > presents it with A1 opportunities to learn from - learning from mistakes. > From my own experience of training evolution, I needed to flag +- 100 > examples as junk, and only 1 or 2 corrections (flagging junk as not > junk). But this last action will depend on the nature of your > "legitimate" email - if you get a lot of key spamlike words in your > regular email you may indeed have to correct quite a few bad spam decisions. > Rod
Ok, thanks Last tricky one. What if I have 20 known (repeating) spam messages, can I Junk them over and over again to up the count on those specific contents? In other words, if I have messages I get over and over again, can I "fool" SA by marking the messages as Junk over and over again to get to 200 messages quicker? I just cant wait to get 200x Viagra discounts :) _______________________________________________ Evolution-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
