Dave Sherohman wrote:
This does happen, but after a while firefox' filters will learn that this was a mistake. I find it much easier to get firefox' filters into shape by letting it just mark the messages it deletes, but still show them in the mailbox. That way it is easy to press "del" on the mail to undelete it, and then click the junk icon to mark it as non-spam. The red Xes also serve as a reminder to do a "compact folders".On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 07:03:03PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:However, I am still doing the destination sorting via kmail, so I could pick d-u off before it checks the headers SA adds, but I see little or nothing to be gained by that in the real world.But that is one way I suppose. I suppose one could write a procmail rule to bypass the SA run there, but again, to what real world effect?One of Steve's major issues appears to be a concern that spam coming from d-u could train his bayesian filters to establish a positive correlation between d-u and spam, causing d-u to generate false positives.
SA or no, the filter will learn that some and only some of the mail from a specific sender is junk. At first it will tend to mark all list-mail as good, then it might swing over into marking all list-mail as bad, but after a while it does stabilize on basically ignoring the sender info if it is from a list.Ignoring SA's headers on d-u mail would do nothing to prevent this (mis)training of the filters, which would be the reason to bypass SA entirely for mail from the list.
I also have to say that debian-users is pretty low on junk-content compared to some other lists I frequent.