cheers();
> > > Great idea, but according to the Kmail handbook (Kmail does have
> > > filtering on the server), you still have to download the headers in
> > > order for the filters to work. So any message that you keep for download
> > > is effectively downloaded twice - first to get the headers
On Sat, 2003-01-04 at 15:14, guenther wrote:
> cheers();
>
> > Great idea, but according to the Kmail handbook (Kmail does have
> > filtering on the server), you still have to download the headers in
> > order for the filters to work. So any message that you keep for download
> > is effectively do
cheers();
> Great idea, but according to the Kmail handbook (Kmail does have
> filtering on the server), you still have to download the headers in
> order for the filters to work. So any message that you keep for download
> is effectively downloaded twice - first to get the headers for the
> filte
On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 15:42, Not Zed wrote:
> Its been suggested before ...
>
> You could just use an external app, and link it in the same way the
> spamassasin stuff is normally linked in.
>
> I still think doing it at the server end is the way to go though,
> otherwise you have to waste time d
On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 04:46, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
> Ximian is considering implementing a bayesian spam filter within
> Evolution itself. Management is pushing for it to be implemented for
> Evolution 1.4 but I seriously doubt Michael and I will have the time to
> do it in so short an amount of t
On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 12:12:00PM -0500, Jim Frost wrote:
> Anyway, in case this spurs someone to do some work, I did spend some
> time working on an imap server based bayesian system. The idea was that
> with imap the folders are all on the server and I can easily create a
> special "spam" folde
Jim Frost ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) had this to say on 01/02/03 at 19:07:
> Of course I did. It has about a 90% success rate and more than a 1%
> false positive rate and requires me to diligently keep up the rule
> base. Now, 90% success would be great, but 1% false is a killer. That
> means I'll se
On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 21:56, Jim Frost wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 21:46, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
> > just to get this thread to stop, since it's going no where...
> >
> > Ximian is considering implementing a bayesian spam filter within
> > Evolution itself. Management is pushing for it to be i
On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 21:46, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
> just to get this thread to stop, since it's going no where...
>
> Ximian is considering implementing a bayesian spam filter within
> Evolution itself. Management is pushing for it to be implemented for
> Evolution 1.4 but I seriously doubt Mic
just to get this thread to stop, since it's going no where...
Ximian is considering implementing a bayesian spam filter within
Evolution itself. Management is pushing for it to be implemented for
Evolution 1.4 but I seriously doubt Michael and I will have the time to
do it in so short an amount of
On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 20:36, Brett Johnson wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 16:46, Jim Frost wrote:
> > On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 18:13, guenther wrote:
> > > If you don't control the server, get your own. ;)
> >
> > I do have my own for personal use. Cannot have my own for corporate
> > use, don't hav
On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 18:48, Arthur Britto wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 09:12, Jim Frost wrote:
> > I note that I looked into spamassassin, which seems to be the preferred
> > technique using an external filter, and I really dislike its rule-based
> > system. Way too many false positives, and a
On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 16:46, Jim Frost wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 18:13, guenther wrote:
> > If you don't control the server, get your own. ;)
>
> I do have my own for personal use. Cannot have my own for corporate
> use, don't have the choice.
What, is there a corporate policy preventing yo
On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 09:12, Jim Frost wrote:
> I note that I looked into spamassassin, which seems to be the preferred
> technique using an external filter, and I really dislike its rule-based
> system. Way too many false positives, and a lot of work to set up and
> maintain too. Spam filtering
On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 18:13, guenther wrote:
> If you don't control the server, get your own. ;)
I do have my own for personal use. Cannot have my own for corporate
use, don't have the choice.
> I know, you mentioned spamassassin, but have you really
> considered it?
Of course I did. It has ab
cheers();
> > Its been suggested before ...
> >
> > You could just use an external app, and link it in the same way the
> > spamassasin stuff is normally linked in.
> >
> > I still think doing it at the server end is the way to go though,
> > otherwise you have to waste time downloading the mess
On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 17:42, Not Zed wrote:
> Its been suggested before ...
>
> You could just use an external app, and link it in the same way the
> spamassasin stuff is normally linked in.
>
> I still think doing it at the server end is the way to go though,
> otherwise you have to waste time d
Its been suggested before ...
You could just use an external app, and link it in the same way the
spamassasin stuff is normally linked in.
I still think doing it at the server end is the way to go though,
otherwise you have to waste time downloading the message anyway.
On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 03:
18 matches
Mail list logo
