Re: Définition du spam par l'utilisateur
On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 07:17:08PM +0100,
François TOURDE <fra-duf-no-spam@tourde.org> wrote
a message of 32 lines which said:
> Si tu envoies (forward) le [h|sp]am comme ça, ce sont les entêtes de
> l'émetteur (soi-même) qui vont être pris en compte par sa-learn,
> non?
C'est une très bonne chose. Voir http://www.paulgraham.com/better.html
pour une explication.
But I think the most important difference is probably that they
ignored message headers. To anyone who has worked on spam filters,
this will seem a perverse decision. And yet in the very first filters
I tried writing, I ignored the headers too. Why? Because I wanted to
keep the problem neat. I didn't know much about mail headers then, and
they seemed to me full of random stuff. There is a lesson here for
filter writers: don't ignore data. You'd think this lesson would be
too obvious to mention, but I've had to learn it several times.
Reply to: