Joe Flowers wrote:
If your "spread" is good and it's just the threshold that needs adjusting, it would be trivial to make a rule that fires on every message and give > it a score equal to the desired difference...
Thanks Pierre. That may be what I have to do, if noone has a better idea.
Actually, what this discussion has inspired me to do is to investigate the idea of having a script auto-adjust each user's spam_threshold.
Currently, I've got a setup where users have two trash folders: one for spam, one for ham. Every hour, a cron job runs sa-learn on the contents of those folders. However, something *else* that it does is it records each message to a "spamlog", which holds the SA spam score and whether or not the user felt that it was spam or not.
Originally, I did it so that I could give users personalized values in a page which would look like this (http://fruitpie.blastpoint.com/~jemenake/spamreport.cgi). However, after reading this thread, I think I'm deciding that this isn't necessary. The user can just indicate what their desired level of false-positives or false-negatives is. Then, my hourly script, after it runs sa-learn and updates the spamlog, it could run some stats on the updated spam log and figure out the best spam_threshold in order to achive the user's desired FP or FN rate.
I'd suggest that you pursue something like that... (or you can wait for me to write mine)
- Joe
-- When freedom gives way to tyranny, it is not because tyranny comes dressed as a wolf. Rather, it comes dressed as a shepherd, pointing out other wolves. Go *read* the Patriot Act.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
