[Spambayes] x-hammie-disposition in pop3proxy

[Tim@mail.powweb.com]

Richie,

>X-Spambayes-Judgement: Spam / Unsure / Ham
>X-Spambayes-Is-Spam: Yes / Unsure / No
>X-Spambayes-Looks-Like-Spam: Yes / Unsure / No

I vote for the first.  It contains the most information: This is a judgement, made by spambayes, that says this email is <_>.  This is all that should go in this 
header, unless there is something we can do to make the header less forgeable by spammers, which I doubt.

Further information in other headers might be very useful.  It certainly is in spam assassin.  What information spambayes might be able to share... the stats 
dudes probably have a better handle on that than me.

11/2/2002 3:03:38 PM, Richie Hindle <richie@entrian.com> wrote:

>Hi Tim,
>
>> Ok, so Tim says I'm not reading it backwards, Richie says I am...
>
>Some misunderstanding I think - the header means "Is it spam?"  But you're
>right, 'Yes' / 'No' is less clear (unless we rename the header to something
>that makes it clear) than 'Spam' / 'Ham'.  Have we collectively decided
>that 'Ham' is the official word for non-Spam?  Someone pointed out a while
>ago that it's a little impolite towards Hormel to imply that Spam is the
>opposite of ham... though that might be a little hyper-sensitive.  Someone
>else (I should check my references but I'm lazy 8-) suggested that our use
>of the word 'Ham' is a useful USP.  I vote for keeping it.
>
>I also agree that the header should have a new name - Hammie was the first
>front-end to the spambayes project, and other front-ends have since
>inherited the header, which is a bit daft (sorry Neale!).  I'd like to drop
>the techie word 'disposition' as well - how about:
>
>X-Spambayes-Judgement: Spam / Unsure / Ham
>X-Spambayes-Is-Spam: Yes / Unsure / No
>X-Spambayes-Looks-Like-Spam: Yes / Unsure / No
>
>If we're going to change this, we should make sure we get it right first
>(albeit second) time.  That includes deciding whether there are optional
>extra details that can go into the header, or whether there's an optional
>extra header to carry those details.  I think there *should* be optional
>extra details, probably in a separate header - it's one of the cool things
>about SpamAssassin.  I vote to drop all extra details from the main header,
>then decide later on whether there should be an extra header.
>
>We ought to sort this out soon, because more and more people are starting
>to use the software, and we're going to affect them all if/when we rename
>headers.
>
>-- 
>Richie Hindle
>richie@entrian.com
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Spambayes mailing list
>Spambayes@python.org
>http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes
>
>
>
>
- Tim
www.fourstonesExpressions.com