Re: [SAtalk] FW: Feedback on how identified spam is being handled

2003-09-08 Thread Kris Deugau
Replied-to-sender and CC'ed to the list (I usually reply direct to the list, not the sender) as Sourceforge has rejected my reply twice. >:( Bill Polhemus wrote: > Since I don't want the stuff appended by SA to be part of the email used to > train Bayesian, I have to go through each message (I us

Re: [SAtalk] FW: Feedback on how identified spam is being handled

2003-09-07 Thread Nigel Wilkinson
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 15:55:40 -0400 Burt Juda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You can pipe it thru 'formail' to nuke the headers that SA added, like > so: > > cat FILE | formail -I'X-Spam-Checker-Version:' -I'X-Spam-Level:" > \ > -I'X-Spam-Status:' -ds sa-learn --[s]ham > > The

Re: [SAtalk] FW: Feedback on how identified spam is being handled

2003-09-07 Thread Burt Juda
Bill Polhemus wrote: Since I don't want the stuff appended by SA to be part of the email used to train Bayesian, I have to go through each message (I use PINE for this) and write out the ORIGINAL message to a separate file which I then use for training. Is there an easier way to do thia? If I had

Re[2]: [SAtalk] FW: Feedback on how identified spam is being handled

2003-09-06 Thread Robert Menschel
Hello Bill, Saturday, September 6, 2003, 5:46:29 PM, you wrote: RM>> All spam is then kept to be used as part of our corpus. Our spam RM>> corpus is nearing 20k messages -- we'll probably start deleting the RM>> oldest spam shortly. BP> Here's a newbie question for you: BP> When you say "used

RE: [SAtalk] FW: Feedback on how identified spam is being handled

2003-09-06 Thread Bill Polhemus
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Menschel Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 8:25 PM To: Phil N Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SAtalk] FW: Feedback on how identified spam is being handled > All spam is then kept to be used

Re: [SAtalk] FW: Feedback on how identified spam is being handled

2003-09-05 Thread Robert Menschel
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Phil, Friday, September 5, 2003, 8:56:40 AM, you wrote: PN> I was wondering if I could get some feedback from people that are PN> doing more than just identifying spam in the subject for their users PN> to handle themselves. My pleasure, PN>

Re: [SAtalk] FW: Feedback on how identified spam is being handled

2003-09-05 Thread SpamAssassin Talk
Phil N wrote: I was wondering if I could get some feedback from people that are doing more than just identifying spam in the subject for their users to handle themselves. Specifically: - are you deleting any messages marked as spam? No. I'll put them to a user-specific IMAP folder. - how are yo

Re: [SAtalk] FW: Feedback on how identified spam is being handled

2003-09-05 Thread wrolf . courtney
| |cc: | | Subject: Re: [SAtalk] FW: Feedback on how identified spam is being handled | >---| On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Phil N wrote: > I was wonderin

Re: [SAtalk] FW: Feedback on how identified spam is being handled

2003-09-05 Thread Andreas Stollar
On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Phil N wrote: > I was wondering if I could get some feedback from people that are doing > more than just identifying spam in the subject for their users to handle > themselves. > > Specifically: > > - are you deleting any messages marked as spam? > - how are you determining

[SAtalk] FW: Feedback on how identified spam is being handled

2003-09-05 Thread Phil N
I was wondering if I could get some feedback from people that are doing more than just identifying spam in the subject for their users to handle themselves. Specifically: - are you deleting any messages marked as spam? - how are you determining when to delete it (all identified? Score >= x.xx?)