--As of September 28, 2006 11:05:35 AM -0700, Kelson is alleged to have
said:
Daniel Staal wrote:
Depends on the setup. For instance, given the explanations above, I'll
start a system to automatically learn from my 'checkspam' folder, but
not my 'highspam' folder. I have procmail
On Wed, 2006-09-27 at 21:00 -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
Bill Horne wrote:
I have a follow on question, so I'll add it to this thread:
Assuming that it's a good idea to feed Caught spams through sa-learn
in order to reinforce the tokens that might not have been autolearned,
how do I
Mike Woods wrote:
Why not simply turn off autolearning? Then you can feed everything
to sa-learn and not worry about it.
Feeding everything through sa-learn again and again would take huge
amounts of time, if i take the spam folders of me and one of the
directors there are over 100,000
Bowie Bailey wrote:
Why would you feed things through again and again? My point was that
if you turn off auto-learning, you have complete control over what is
learned.
I wouldn't, but when you said Then you can feed everything to sa-learn
and not worry about it
I assumed that's what you
Mike Woods wrote:
Bowie Bailey wrote:
You don't have to figure out what has and has not already been
learned. Just filter everything into directories for ham and spam
learning and feed the entire directory to sa-learn. Once you have
learned the messages, you can either delete them,
Daniel Staal wrote:
Depends on the setup. For instance, given the explanations above, I'll
start a system to automatically learn from my 'checkspam' folder, but
not my 'highspam' folder. I have procmail automatically sort my spam by
score, so I can pay extra attention to low-scoring spam.
Mike Woods schrieb:
Hi guys, bit of a query regarding sa-learn and messages that have
already been tagged as spam.
We have spamassassin scanning mail via amavisd and sending any caught
spams to a spam folder in the users accounts (using plus addressing),
we've also been getting users to drop
Mike Woods wrote:
Hi guys, bit of a query regarding sa-learn and messages that have
already been tagged as spam.
We have spamassassin scanning mail via amavisd and sending any caught
spams to a spam folder in the users accounts (using plus addressing),
we've also been getting users to drop
Daniel T. Staal wrote:
On Wed, September 27, 2006 10:43 am, Matt Kettler said:
Mike Woods wrote:
Hi guys, bit of a query regarding sa-learn and messages that have
already been tagged as spam.
We have spamassassin scanning mail via amavisd and sending any caught
spams to a spam folder in the
Daniel T. Staal wrote:
On Wed, September 27, 2006 11:10 am, Jim Maul said:
I believe that SA will not learn a message it has seen before so
multiple sa-learn's will not have any affect.
Actually, that was my impression too.
Which means, for the orginal question, that re-learning the
The internet is a great place for raising more questions than it answers :D
Given all the opinions I think I will move the caught spam's into the
learning cycle however i'm also going to make sure that each spam is
only ever fed through the system once, this wont be a problem since I
already
From: Mike Woods [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The internet is a great place for raising more questions than it
answers
:D
Given all the opinions I think I will move the caught spam's into the
learning cycle however i'm also going to make sure that each spam is
only ever fed through the
Mike Woods wrote:
The internet is a great place for raising more questions than it
answers :D
Given all the opinions I think I will move the caught spam's into the
learning cycle however i'm also going to make sure that each spam is
only ever fed through the system once, this wont be a
Which means, for the orginal question, that re-learning the already caught
spams will have very little effect other than wasting some processor
cycles. Doing what he is doing right now is probably best.
This is assuming that they were auto-learned. Not all system are configured
for
identified as spam in this process, I know sa-learn looks for common
patterns in spams to identify them as spam but im unsure if adding known
spams in would be beneficial in this ?
I have a follow on question, so I'll add it to this thread:
Assuming that it's a good idea to feed Caught spams through
Bill Horne wrote:
I have a follow on question, so I'll add it to this thread:
Assuming that it's a good idea to feed Caught spams through sa-learn
in order to reinforce the tokens that might not have been autolearned,
how do I tell SA to ignore the SPAM notice in the subject? I
--As of September 27, 2006 5:43:28 PM -0700, Kelson is alleged to have said:
Daniel T. Staal wrote:
True. So... Optimal is obviously to train, once and correctly, on all
messages. Sending a message through that has been trained will consume
*some* resources, but less then one that still
For instance, given the explanations above, I'll
start a system to automatically learn from my 'checkspam' folder, but not
my 'highspam' folder.
Remember that your 'highspam' may be separated from 'checkspam' largely
based on network tests; I often see identical messages with a 6-8 point
18 matches
Mail list logo
