[Spambayes] training

Tim Stone - Four Stones Expressions tim at fourstonesExpressions.com
Wed Feb 19 11:23:46 EST 2003


2/19/2003 11:12:38 AM, Neale Pickett <neale at woozle.org> wrote:

>Tim Stone - Four Stones Expressions <tim at fourstonesExpressions.com> 
writes:
>
>> The problem here is that some mailers pretty much lose most of 
the
>> headers when you do a forward operation
>
>That is exactly the problem.  Also, consider the company that gets
>gigabytes of email every day.  How long do they keep a message in 
their
>pool for future training?
>
>And anyway, forwarding a message to a special address is still too 
much
>work.

Argh.  I know you're right, but I don't *want* you to be right...

>  I know that sounds ludicrous, especially when your aunt is
>constantly forwarding you inspirational messages about leprechauns, 
but
>most people at work would rather just junk the spam than take the 
time
>to forward it to a special address.

Outlook plugin enables this behavior.  Can we assume that the only 
people who use pop3 are those who are a bit higher on the computer 
user foodchain than the norm for Outlook users?  (I know, I know, 
Tim Peters uses Outlook, too...) If so, maybe they'll accept a bit 
more behavioral expectation...

>  Even if you promise them that after
>a week they won't have to do it as often.  Especially then, 
actually.
>We have to make this dead simple or it's not going to get used.

Absolutely.  As things are right now, it's not useable by anyone but 
people like us, which as dismaying as that may be, is not the norm.

>
>Now, if you're sending suspected spam to an *administrator*, I 
think you

We can call the special address "spamadmin at myhost.com"  You *can* 
fool some of the people all of the time  (A. Lincoln)

>can get away with the "forward to special address" idea.  But then
>there's no reason to store mail anywhere, since we can (presumably)
>trust the administrator to send back the original message,
>unadulterated.  In fact, we could bundle all spam messages up as an
>attachment, and then the admin can just forward back the 
attachment.
>Does outlook mangle message/rfc822 attachments?
>
>This doesn't deal with the problem of false negatives, but maybe a 
few
>dedicated end-users (as opposed to end-admins) would send in enough
>false negatives to make it all work.
>
>Neale
>
>_______________________________________________
>Spambayes mailing list
>Spambayes at python.org
>http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes
>
>


c'est moi - TimS
http://www.fourstonesExpressions.com
http://wecanstopspam.org





More information about the Spambayes mailing list