Re: no filtering without ham

David Relson <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.mail.bogofilter.general
Organization Osage Software Systems, Inc.
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 13:47:30 +0100
Sven Burmeister wrote:

> Hello everybody!
> 
> I use bogofilter with kmail and it works very well. However there is
> an issue that comes up quite frequently with people who start using
> kmail+bogofilter for the first time.
> 
> The issue is that bogofilter seems to only start marking as spam
> after the user has marked some emails as ham.
> 
> >From the questions I answered for new users, their workflow is
> >something like 
> this:
> 
> - Use kmail's anti-spam wizard to set-up filters. This means that
> spam will be moved into some other folder than the inbox.
> - Wait for spam and mark it as such to train bogofilter.
> 
> They do not mark emails as ham, because there is no need to, since
> they were not moved into the spam folder, i.e. for them, as long as
> it is not falsely marked as spam, there is no need to tell bogofilter
> that it did something wrong.
> 
> As a result, bogofilter never starts to sort out spam emails, no
> matter how long they train it by marking spam emails. Hence for them
> bogofilter+kmail do not work.
> 
> There are several ways to work around this issue.
> 
> - Kmail could pipe some bogus mails through bogofilter as ham, to
> feed the wordlist.
> - Kmail could mark all incoming mails as ham
> - Kmail could display a message when setting up filters that tell the
> user to mark emails as spam and ham, since otherwise bogofilter will
> not work.
> - bogofilter could start working after it was trained with spam
> emails only and get the ham stats after that, when users mark false
> positives.
> 
> Before I talk to the kmail devs, are you aware of this issue and what 
> "solution" would you prefer? Maybe you have an even better approach,
> so feel free to comment and add.
> 
> Sven

Hello Sven,

"No filtering without ham" is exactly right!  A bayesian filter's job
is distinguishing "good" from "bad" and it does this by comparing a new
message to what it has been told "good" and "bad" mean.  Without
knowledge of _both_ good and bad, it cannot do its job.

Your strategies are, generally, reasonable.  I don't like the "pipe
bogus mail" strategy, but the others are fine -- assuming the user is
informed of the need to deal with classification errors -- of which
there will be plenty until bogofilter has a reasonable wordlist.

Regards,

David
_______________________________________________
Bogofilter mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.bogofilter.org/mailman/listinfo/bogofilter
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.