On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 21:24:46 -0400 "Matt Kettler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is autolearning really that important? > I consider autolearning useful, but I don't consider skipping learning on > 5-50% of autolearnable emails to be enough of a problem to be worth all the > extra code. > It just seems like a lot of work for a relatively small gain on a > non-critical function. Particularly considering that even if you do > autolearn every autolearnable email you've still not replaced the need for > manual training. oh, i didn't see it that way :] to me, it seems that skipping autolearn emails is a bug (unless it was designed that way), thus i suggested two possible fixes. Though you seem to think this problem is not really a problem. i guess it all depends if autolearn has any *real* effect or not.
