Junk Filter Wimpy? - Mozilla

This is a discussion on Junk Filter Wimpy? - Mozilla ; Due to nobody's fault other than my own, I suppose, I get to work on Monday morning with 500+ pieces of email, 90% of which are always junk. Enlargers, drugs, Cyrillic announcements (sometimes in Russian, sometimes transliterations of English ones, ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 38

Thread: Junk Filter Wimpy?

  1. Junk Filter Wimpy?

    Due to nobody's fault other than my own, I suppose, I get to work on
    Monday morning with 500+ pieces of email, 90% of which are always junk.
    Enlargers, drugs, Cyrillic announcements (sometimes in Russian,
    sometimes transliterations of English ones, for whatever reason) or
    Japanese ones, etc.

    This number is not going down, as I sit and individually mark the junk
    ones as junk.

    Is there a way to get recognition going a bit more robustly? It takes
    about a half hour on Monday, and fifteen minutes on other days.

    Thanks.

    Don.

  2. Re: Junk Filter Wimpy?

    Sounds like it is time for a change of Edress.

    Donald Cook wrote:
    > Due to nobody's fault other than my own, I suppose, I get to work on
    > Monday morning with 500+ pieces of email, 90% of which are always junk.
    > Enlargers, drugs, Cyrillic announcements (sometimes in Russian,
    > sometimes transliterations of English ones, for whatever reason) or
    > Japanese ones, etc.
    >
    > This number is not going down, as I sit and individually mark the junk
    > ones as junk.
    >
    > Is there a way to get recognition going a bit more robustly? It takes
    > about a half hour on Monday, and fifteen minutes on other days.
    >
    > Thanks.
    >
    > Don.


  3. Re: Junk Filter Wimpy?

    Donald Cook wrote:
    > Due to nobody's fault other than my own, I suppose, I get to work on
    > Monday morning with 500+ pieces of email, 90% of which are always junk.
    > Enlargers, drugs, Cyrillic announcements (sometimes in Russian,
    > sometimes transliterations of English ones, for whatever reason) or
    > Japanese ones, etc.
    >
    > This number is not going down, as I sit and individually mark the junk
    > ones as junk.
    >
    > Is there a way to get recognition going a bit more robustly? It takes
    > about a half hour on Monday, and fifteen minutes on other days.
    >
    > Thanks.
    >
    > Don.


    Might be time to try retraining the JMC:

    Tools>>Options>>Privacy

    On the Junk tab, click the Reset button.

    Lee

  4. Re: Junk Filter Wimpy?

    Donald Cook wrote:
    > This number is not going down, as I sit and individually mark the junk
    > ones as junk.


    I migrated to TB just as V2 was releasing, so I think one build of 1.5.xxx.

    I found back then that it was necessary to exit TB "once and a while" to have the junk mail actually learn. I recall getting really frustrated one day marking a bunch of junk mail junk, exited TB,
    fired it back up, and magically it started marking junk as junk / moving it to the junk folder.

    --
    Michael Lueck
    Lueck Data Systems
    http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/

  5. Re: Junk Filter Wimpy?

    Michael Lueck wrote:
    > Donald Cook wrote:
    >> This number is not going down, as I sit and individually mark the junk
    >> ones as junk.

    >
    > I migrated to TB just as V2 was releasing, so I think one build of 1.5.xxx.
    >
    > I found back then that it was necessary to exit TB "once and a while" to
    > have the junk mail actually learn. I recall getting really frustrated
    > one day marking a bunch of junk mail junk, exited TB, fired it back up,
    > and magically it started marking junk as junk / moving it to the junk
    > folder.
    >


    Thanks, all, for replying.

    What I didn't say before was that I get about a on third reduction of my
    email through the junk filter, but that does not seem very impressive to
    me. I note that my boss, who uses Outlook, gets about nine tenths of his
    mail junked.

    In order:

    I could change my e-address, as suggested, but that would be pretty
    complicated, seems to me. It's my work address, so not so convenient,
    and I don't know how to notify everybody in my Add. book.

    I think retraining might be a good idea, although painful for a few
    weeks, probably. This is a MAJOR onslaught I get every day.

    As for exiting, I don't leave it up. OTOH, I use TB Tray. Does anyone
    know if TB Tray leaves the mail client up?

    Don.

  6. Re: Junk Filter Wimpy?

    Donald Cook keyboarded, On 1/14/2008 4:09 PM :
    > Michael Lueck wrote:
    >> Donald Cook wrote:
    >>> This number is not going down, as I sit and individually mark the
    >>> junk ones as junk.

    >>
    >> I migrated to TB just as V2 was releasing, so I think one build of
    >> 1.5.xxx.
    >>
    >> I found back then that it was necessary to exit TB "once and a while"
    >> to have the junk mail actually learn. I recall getting really
    >> frustrated one day marking a bunch of junk mail junk, exited TB,
    >> fired it back up, and magically it started marking junk as junk /
    >> moving it to the junk folder.
    >>

    >
    > Thanks, all, for replying.
    >
    > What I didn't say before was that I get about a on third reduction of
    > my email through the junk filter, but that does not seem very
    > impressive to me. I note that my boss, who uses Outlook, gets about
    > nine tenths of his mail junked.
    >
    > In order:
    >
    > I could change my e-address, as suggested, but that would be pretty
    > complicated, seems to me. It's my work address, so not so convenient,
    > and I don't know how to notify everybody in my Add. book.
    >
    > I think retraining might be a good idea, although painful for a few
    > weeks, probably. This is a MAJOR onslaught I get every day.
    >
    > As for exiting, I don't leave it up. OTOH, I use TB Tray. Does anyone
    > know if TB Tray leaves the mail client up?
    >
    > Don.


    Yes, the tray thing puts Tb into background so it can continue to poll
    the servers.

    A key to junk filtering is to also mark some good mail as not-junk. The
    filter retains useage data for words with frequency of both good (Ham)
    and bad (Spam) together with percentile scores. One tactic of Spammers
    is to poison these word lists to cause a reduction in efficiency, thus
    forcing you to see the subject lines. If the file size of your
    training.dat file in the Tb profile is over 1.5 MB, you should try
    building a new file. There is a JAVA application that can help prune
    the file of low value words and improve performance. The value of the
    pruning is avoiding the extra time for up to 14 days while training a
    new filter data file.

    The JAVA program is an inactive project at mozdev.org at this URL:
    http://bayesjunktool.mozdev.org/

    --
    Ron K.
    Who is General Failure, and why is he searching my HDD?
    Kernel Restore reported BSOD use by Major Error to msg the enemy!

  7. Re: Junk Filter Wimpy?

    Ron K. wrote:
    > Donald Cook keyboarded, On 1/14/2008 4:09 PM :
    >> Michael Lueck wrote:
    >>> Donald Cook wrote:
    >>>> This number is not going down, as I sit and individually mark the
    >>>> junk ones as junk.
    >>>
    >>> I migrated to TB just as V2 was releasing, so I think one build of
    >>> 1.5.xxx.
    >>>
    >>> I found back then that it was necessary to exit TB "once and a while"
    >>> to have the junk mail actually learn. I recall getting really
    >>> frustrated one day marking a bunch of junk mail junk, exited TB,
    >>> fired it back up, and magically it started marking junk as junk /
    >>> moving it to the junk folder.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Thanks, all, for replying.
    >>
    >> What I didn't say before was that I get about a on third reduction of
    >> my email through the junk filter, but that does not seem very
    >> impressive to me. I note that my boss, who uses Outlook, gets about
    >> nine tenths of his mail junked.
    >>
    >> In order:
    >>
    >> I could change my e-address, as suggested, but that would be pretty
    >> complicated, seems to me. It's my work address, so not so convenient,
    >> and I don't know how to notify everybody in my Add. book.
    >>
    >> I think retraining might be a good idea, although painful for a few
    >> weeks, probably. This is a MAJOR onslaught I get every day.
    >>
    >> As for exiting, I don't leave it up. OTOH, I use TB Tray. Does anyone
    >> know if TB Tray leaves the mail client up?
    >>
    >> Don.

    >
    > Yes, the tray thing puts Tb into background so it can continue to poll
    > the servers.
    >
    > A key to junk filtering is to also mark some good mail as not-junk. The
    > filter retains useage data for words with frequency of both good (Ham)
    > and bad (Spam) together with percentile scores. One tactic of Spammers
    > is to poison these word lists to cause a reduction in efficiency, thus
    > forcing you to see the subject lines. If the file size of your
    > training.dat file in the Tb profile is over 1.5 MB, you should try
    > building a new file. There is a JAVA application that can help prune
    > the file of low value words and improve performance. The value of the
    > pruning is avoiding the extra time for up to 14 days while training a
    > new filter data file.
    >
    > The JAVA program is an inactive project at mozdev.org at this URL:
    > http://bayesjunktool.mozdev.org/
    >

    Ron,

    Thanks for your suggestion.

    OK, looked at my training.dat file, and it is over 5MB. Larger than you
    suggest keeping around. How can it get so big?

    So just for grins looked at the junktool program, but installation is
    just too unfamiliar to this country boy. Managed to nav to the proper
    directory and execute the command, but the program keeps crashing when I
    try to direct it to C:\Documents and Settings ... etc., where the
    training.dat file is located.

    So the only option now is to get rid of my swollen training.dat file?

    Don.

  8. Re: Junk Filter Wimpy?

    Donald Cook wrote:
    > Ron K. wrote:
    >> Donald Cook keyboarded, On 1/14/2008 4:09 PM :
    >>>>> This number is not going down, as I sit and individually mark the
    >>>>> junk ones as junk.

    > Don.


    Don, I've been battling with Outlook and with Thunderbird's junk filter
    myself for months, with more or less the same ridiculous results as
    you've seen.

    There seems to be no real way to make the bayes filter any more robust
    than is acceptable for non-continuous use - new users with occasional
    mail connects. I'm not being deliberately "snobby", this is just a fact
    of life. I get 60+ emails a day, 40 or more of which are spam, some
    harvested from forums and posts more than 10 years ago.

    My answer (and it absolutely works!) is to use Robin Keir's K9 mail
    filter (http://keir.net). If you've got a POP account, it just works.

    It's a tiny bit of a fiddle to get up and running (it acts as a proxy),
    but since I installed it 7 weeks ago, I've turned off the TB junk filter
    entirely, and my spam has gone to zero within 3 days of starting to use
    it. It just works. I know that sounds like "something for nothing", but
    I promise you, it doesn't even beat the bayesian filtering - they're
    just not in the same league.

    That's using the same "training set" that I've documented on this forum
    before, the same training set that just confused and broke TB's junk
    filter(s) repeatedly.

    My false negatives has started to rise lately to 1 in about 750, but
    that's because I haven't done the housecleaning lately.

    Get K9, turn off the useless Thunderbird spam filter, and set up K9 to
    add a [SPAM] prefix to your subject, then set up a rule to move [SPAM}
    to the junk folder.

    Problem solved, I guarantee it.

    If you need any help with configuration, the readme is great all of what
    you need is in the first paragraph. The server check details (which you
    probably don't need to use) is a bit counter-intuitive, but the rest is
    like a dream.

    K9 saved my sanity. And I'm not affiliated or connected in any way with
    Robin Keir or the K9 project.

    HTH!
    PC Pete

  9. Re: Junk Filter Wimpy?

    Donald Cook keyboarded, On 1/14/2008 6:41 PM :
    > Ron K. wrote:
    >> Donald Cook keyboarded, On 1/14/2008 4:09 PM :
    >>> Michael Lueck wrote:
    >>>> Donald Cook wrote:
    >>>>> This number is not going down, as I sit and individually mark the
    >>>>> junk ones as junk.
    >>>>
    >>>> I migrated to TB just as V2 was releasing, so I think one build of
    >>>> 1.5.xxx.
    >>>>
    >>>> I found back then that it was necessary to exit TB "once and a
    >>>> while" to have the junk mail actually learn. I recall getting
    >>>> really frustrated one day marking a bunch of junk mail junk, exited
    >>>> TB, fired it back up, and magically it started marking junk as junk
    >>>> / moving it to the junk folder.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Thanks, all, for replying.
    >>>
    >>> What I didn't say before was that I get about a on third reduction
    >>> of my email through the junk filter, but that does not seem very
    >>> impressive to me. I note that my boss, who uses Outlook, gets about
    >>> nine tenths of his mail junked.
    >>>
    >>> In order:
    >>>
    >>> I could change my e-address, as suggested, but that would be pretty
    >>> complicated, seems to me. It's my work address, so not so
    >>> convenient, and I don't know how to notify everybody in my Add. book.
    >>>
    >>> I think retraining might be a good idea, although painful for a few
    >>> weeks, probably. This is a MAJOR onslaught I get every day.
    >>>
    >>> As for exiting, I don't leave it up. OTOH, I use TB Tray. Does
    >>> anyone know if TB Tray leaves the mail client up?
    >>>
    >>> Don.

    >>
    >> Yes, the tray thing puts Tb into background so it can continue to
    >> poll the servers.
    >>
    >> A key to junk filtering is to also mark some good mail as not-junk.
    >> The filter retains useage data for words with frequency of both good
    >> (Ham) and bad (Spam) together with percentile scores. One tactic of
    >> Spammers is to poison these word lists to cause a reduction in
    >> efficiency, thus forcing you to see the subject lines. If the file
    >> size of your training.dat file in the Tb profile is over 1.5 MB, you
    >> should try building a new file. There is a JAVA application that can
    >> help prune the file of low value words and improve performance. The
    >> value of the pruning is avoiding the extra time for up to 14 days
    >> while training a new filter data file.
    >>
    >> The JAVA program is an inactive project at mozdev.org at this URL:
    >> http://bayesjunktool.mozdev.org/
    >>

    > Ron,
    >
    > Thanks for your suggestion.
    >
    > OK, looked at my training.dat file, and it is over 5MB. Larger than
    > you suggest keeping around. How can it get so big?
    >
    > So just for grins looked at the junktool program, but installation is
    > just too unfamiliar to this country boy. Managed to nav to the proper
    > directory and execute the command, but the program keeps crashing when
    > I try to direct it to C:\Documents and Settings ... etc., where the
    > training.dat file is located.
    >
    > So the only option now is to get rid of my swollen training.dat file?
    >
    > Don.


    That is the hugest training file I recall hearing about. We had a thread
    here over a year ago and at the time I had possibly the largest at
    around 2.6 MB. It was like your complaint, only getting about 45-55% of
    the junk. That was before I understood the value of marking good mail
    as 'Not Junk'.

    Start with renaming it by altering the extension. It should cause a new
    training.dat to be created on next startup of Tb.

    The reason the file gets so big is, it is indexing every word contained
    in the mail it scans. This is why some spammers include blocks of random
    word lists in a mail that is pushing an image as the advert. They are
    forcing the filter to index those words to reduce it's effectiveness.
    Also some of the indexed content is items from the mails header info,
    data such as message ID's that are unique.

    An FYI, there has been discussion of rebuilding the filter with more
    advanced mathmatics to gain some immunity from poisoning. If it happens,
    I would expect that may happen for Tb 3.0 release.

    --
    Ron K.
    Who is General Failure, and why is he searching my HDD?
    Kernel Restore reported BSOD use by Major Error to msg the enemy!

  10. Re: Junk Filter Wimpy?

    Ron K. wrote:

    > That is the hugest training file I recall hearing about. We had a thread
    > here over a year ago and at the time I had possibly the largest at
    > around 2.6 MB.


    Mine is "01/12/2008 08:54a 2,085,580 training.dat" and it is a butte!

    Ja, go ahead and rename the file while TB is exited AND the tray icon is shutdown (how ever one closes that program).

    --
    Michael Lueck
    Lueck Data Systems
    http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/

  11. Re: Junk Filter Wimpy?

    On 1/14/2008 3:41 PM Donald Cook scribbled:

    > Ron K. wrote:
    >> Donald Cook keyboarded, On 1/14/2008 4:09 PM :
    >>> Michael Lueck wrote:
    >>>> Donald Cook wrote:
    >>>>> This number is not going down, as I sit and individually mark the
    >>>>> junk ones as junk.
    >>>> I migrated to TB just as V2 was releasing, so I think one build of
    >>>> 1.5.xxx.
    >>>>
    >>>> I found back then that it was necessary to exit TB "once and a while"
    >>>> to have the junk mail actually learn. I recall getting really
    >>>> frustrated one day marking a bunch of junk mail junk, exited TB,
    >>>> fired it back up, and magically it started marking junk as junk /
    >>>> moving it to the junk folder.
    >>>>
    >>> Thanks, all, for replying.
    >>>
    >>> What I didn't say before was that I get about a on third reduction of
    >>> my email through the junk filter, but that does not seem very
    >>> impressive to me. I note that my boss, who uses Outlook, gets about
    >>> nine tenths of his mail junked.
    >>>
    >>> In order:
    >>>
    >>> I could change my e-address, as suggested, but that would be pretty
    >>> complicated, seems to me. It's my work address, so not so convenient,
    >>> and I don't know how to notify everybody in my Add. book.
    >>>
    >>> I think retraining might be a good idea, although painful for a few
    >>> weeks, probably. This is a MAJOR onslaught I get every day.
    >>>
    >>> As for exiting, I don't leave it up. OTOH, I use TB Tray. Does anyone
    >>> know if TB Tray leaves the mail client up?
    >>>
    >>> Don.

    >> Yes, the tray thing puts Tb into background so it can continue to poll
    >> the servers.
    >>
    >> A key to junk filtering is to also mark some good mail as not-junk. The
    >> filter retains useage data for words with frequency of both good (Ham)
    >> and bad (Spam) together with percentile scores. One tactic of Spammers
    >> is to poison these word lists to cause a reduction in efficiency, thus
    >> forcing you to see the subject lines. If the file size of your
    >> training.dat file in the Tb profile is over 1.5 MB, you should try
    >> building a new file. There is a JAVA application that can help prune
    >> the file of low value words and improve performance. The value of the
    >> pruning is avoiding the extra time for up to 14 days while training a
    >> new filter data file.
    >>
    >> The JAVA program is an inactive project at mozdev.org at this URL:
    >> http://bayesjunktool.mozdev.org/
    >>

    > Ron,
    >
    > Thanks for your suggestion.
    >
    > OK, looked at my training.dat file, and it is over 5MB. Larger than you
    > suggest keeping around. How can it get so big?
    >
    > So just for grins looked at the junktool program, but installation is
    > just too unfamiliar to this country boy. Managed to nav to the proper
    > directory and execute the command, but the program keeps crashing when I
    > try to direct it to C:\Documents and Settings ... etc., where the
    > training.dat file is located.
    >
    > So the only option now is to get rid of my swollen training.dat file?
    >
    > Don.


    Won't hurt to nuke it.
    If you are getting that much spam unmarked, you may want to employ a
    proxy like spampal (spampal.org) which uses dnsbls to block known spam
    sources. Its a little more comprehensive than Tbird baysian filters.

  12. Re: Junk Filter Wimpy?

    goodwin wrote:

    > On 1/14/2008 3:41 PM Donald Cook scribbled:
    >> So the only option now is to get rid of my swollen training.dat file?

    >
    > Won't hurt to nuke it.


    Is there a difference in effect between deleting the file training.dat
    and invoking Tools / Options / Privacy / Junk / Reset Training Data ?
    If so, what is it?

    - Rich

  13. Re: Junk Filter Wimpy?

    Rich Pasco wrote:
    > goodwin wrote:
    >
    >> On 1/14/2008 3:41 PM Donald Cook scribbled:
    >>> So the only option now is to get rid of my swollen training.dat file?

    >> Won't hurt to nuke it.

    >
    > Is there a difference in effect between deleting the file training.dat
    > and invoking Tools / Options / Privacy / Junk / Reset Training Data ?
    > If so, what is it?
    >
    > - Rich


    None that I am aware of. I would try it from the UI first.

    Lee

  14. Re: Junk Filter Wimpy?

    On 1/14/2008 6:41 PM, Donald Cook wrote:
    > Ron K. wrote:
    >> Donald Cook keyboarded, On 1/14/2008 4:09 PM :
    >>> Michael Lueck wrote:
    >>>> Donald Cook wrote:
    >>>>> This number is not going down, as I sit and individually mark the
    >>>>> junk ones as junk.
    >>>>
    >>>> I migrated to TB just as V2 was releasing, so I think one build of
    >>>> 1.5.xxx.
    >>>>
    >>>> I found back then that it was necessary to exit TB "once and a
    >>>> while" to have the junk mail actually learn. I recall getting really
    >>>> frustrated one day marking a bunch of junk mail junk, exited TB,
    >>>> fired it back up, and magically it started marking junk as junk /
    >>>> moving it to the junk folder.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Thanks, all, for replying.
    >>>
    >>> What I didn't say before was that I get about a on third reduction of
    >>> my email through the junk filter, but that does not seem very
    >>> impressive to me. I note that my boss, who uses Outlook, gets about
    >>> nine tenths of his mail junked.
    >>>
    >>> In order:
    >>>
    >>> I could change my e-address, as suggested, but that would be pretty
    >>> complicated, seems to me. It's my work address, so not so convenient,
    >>> and I don't know how to notify everybody in my Add. book.
    >>>
    >>> I think retraining might be a good idea, although painful for a few
    >>> weeks, probably. This is a MAJOR onslaught I get every day.
    >>>
    >>> As for exiting, I don't leave it up. OTOH, I use TB Tray. Does anyone
    >>> know if TB Tray leaves the mail client up?
    >>>
    >>> Don.

    >>
    >> Yes, the tray thing puts Tb into background so it can continue to poll
    >> the servers.
    >>
    >> A key to junk filtering is to also mark some good mail as not-junk.
    >> The filter retains useage data for words with frequency of both good
    >> (Ham) and bad (Spam) together with percentile scores. One tactic of
    >> Spammers is to poison these word lists to cause a reduction in
    >> efficiency, thus forcing you to see the subject lines. If the file
    >> size of your training.dat file in the Tb profile is over 1.5 MB, you
    >> should try building a new file. There is a JAVA application that can
    >> help prune the file of low value words and improve performance. The
    >> value of the pruning is avoiding the extra time for up to 14 days
    >> while training a new filter data file.
    >>
    >> The JAVA program is an inactive project at mozdev.org at this URL:
    >> http://bayesjunktool.mozdev.org/
    >>

    > Ron,
    >
    > Thanks for your suggestion.
    >
    > OK, looked at my training.dat file, and it is over 5MB. Larger than you
    > suggest keeping around. How can it get so big?
    >
    > So just for grins looked at the junktool program, but installation is
    > just too unfamiliar to this country boy. Managed to nav to the proper
    > directory and execute the command, but the program keeps crashing when I
    > try to direct it to C:\Documents and Settings ... etc., where the
    > training.dat file is located.
    >
    > So the only option now is to get rid of my swollen training.dat file?
    >
    > Don.


    Because the Baysjunktool always wants to start in My Documents, it might be
    easier to copy training.dat to My Documents for processing. Then replace the
    original with the copy when done. This also has the advantage of allowing you
    to experiment with the options to get your desired file size reduction.

    Also the junk mail controls threshold is adjustable. See this knowledge base
    article, specifically "Tweaking" about half way down:




    --
    G. R. Woodring

  15. Re: Junk Filter Wimpy?

    G. R. Woodring wrote:
    > On 1/14/2008 6:41 PM, Donald Cook wrote:
    >> Ron K. wrote:


    >>>
    >>> The JAVA program is an inactive project at mozdev.org at this URL:
    >>> http://bayesjunktool.mozdev.org/
    >>>

    >> Ron,
    >>
    >> Thanks for your suggestion.
    >>
    >> OK, looked at my training.dat file, and it is over 5MB. Larger than
    >> you suggest keeping around. How can it get so big?
    >>


    Had a look at mine and it is over 6mb and doesn't seem to be
    'learning' anymore.

    Before I switched to TB, I used to use K9 (http://keir.net) which
    was 99% effective. I decided to download it again and try to set
    it up with TB. It was a doddle. Just open up your Account
    properties, select an account and:

    1. Change port from 110 to 9999
    2. Change Pop server from, say, pop.my_own.net to 127.0.0.1
    3. Change account (user) name from, say My_Email@my_own.net,
    to pop.my_own.net/110/My_Email@my_own.net.

    Repeat for any other spam-infested accounts.

    Open up K9 (there's an icon on your task tray) and wait (or
    invoke from TB) for email to arrive. They will show on the K9
    Recent Emails tab and, K9 will already have made an attempt to
    guess what is Good Mail and Spam. Change those that are wrong.

    I installed it yesterday and it is already hitting in excess of
    82% accuracy. Coupled with TB built-in junk masher I'm catching
    close to 100% of spam. Most of the work is being done by K9
    because it works by classifying spam before is leaves the server.

    I'm now going to reset the TB junk settings and see what happens.

    By the way, K9 is free.

    Cheers

    Will

  16. Re: Junk Filter Wimpy?

    On 1/15/2008 6:11 PM, Rich Pasco wrote:
    > goodwin wrote:
    >
    >> On 1/14/2008 3:41 PM Donald Cook scribbled:
    >>> So the only option now is to get rid of my swollen training.dat file?

    >> Won't hurt to nuke it.

    >
    > Is there a difference in effect between deleting the file training.dat
    > and invoking Tools / Options / Privacy / Junk / Reset Training Data ?
    > If so, what is it?
    >
    > - Rich


    no diff.

  17. Re: Junk Filter Wimpy?

    On 1/14/2008 1:48 PM, Donald Cook wrote:
    > Due to nobody's fault other than my own, I suppose, I get to work on
    > Monday morning with 500+ pieces of email, 90% of which are always junk.
    > Enlargers, drugs, Cyrillic announcements (sometimes in Russian,
    > sometimes transliterations of English ones, for whatever reason) or
    > Japanese ones, etc.
    >
    > This number is not going down, as I sit and individually mark the junk
    > ones as junk.
    >
    > Is there a way to get recognition going a bit more robustly? It takes
    > about a half hour on Monday, and fifteen minutes on other days.
    >
    > Thanks.
    >
    > Don.


    update 2.0.0.12 will deliver some JMC fixes.
    if it doesn't fix your issue then please file a bug.

  18. Re: Junk Filter Wimpy?

    Wayne Mery wrote:
    > On 1/15/2008 6:11 PM, Rich Pasco wrote:
    >> goodwin wrote:
    >>
    >>> On 1/14/2008 3:41 PM Donald Cook scribbled:
    >>>> So the only option now is to get rid of my swollen training.dat file?
    >>> Won't hurt to nuke it.

    >>
    >> Is there a difference in effect between deleting the file training.dat
    >> and invoking Tools / Options / Privacy / Junk / Reset Training Data ?
    >> If so, what is it?
    >>
    >> - Rich

    >


    Wayne

    Check out K9 from http://keir.net/k9.html I installed it 4 days
    ago and already it is picking up over 99% of my spam. I've still
    got TB junk switched on and it is interesting that TB doesn't
    pick up much of what K9 identifies.

    Cheers


    Will

  19. Re: Junk Filter Wimpy?

    Wayne Mery keyboarded, On 1/20/2008 1:28 AM :
    > On 1/14/2008 1:48 PM, Donald Cook wrote:
    >> Due to nobody's fault other than my own, I suppose, I get to work on
    >> Monday morning with 500+ pieces of email, 90% of which are always
    >> junk. Enlargers, drugs, Cyrillic announcements (sometimes in Russian,
    >> sometimes transliterations of English ones, for whatever reason) or
    >> Japanese ones, etc.
    >>
    >> This number is not going down, as I sit and individually mark the
    >> junk ones as junk.
    >>
    >> Is there a way to get recognition going a bit more robustly? It takes
    >> about a half hour on Monday, and fifteen minutes on other days.
    >>
    >> Thanks.
    >>
    >> Don.

    >
    > update 2.0.0.12 will deliver some JMC fixes.
    > if it doesn't fix your issue then please file a bug.


    Any bug references for the patches ?

    --
    Ron K.
    Who is General Failure, and why is he searching my HDD?
    Kernel Restore reported BSOD use by Major Error to msg the enemy!

  20. Re: Junk Filter Wimpy?

    On 1/19/2008 11:25 PM Will Chapman scribbled:

    > Wayne
    >
    > Check out K9 from http://keir.net/k9.html I installed it 4 days
    > ago and already it is picking up over 99% of my spam. I've still
    > got TB junk switched on and it is interesting that TB doesn't
    > pick up much of what K9 identifies.
    >
    > Cheers
    >
    >
    > Will


    Tbird is probably trusting K9 tagging/whatever and not bothering to
    check once K9 has passed on it. I don't know K9 but Tbird and Spampal
    (a proxy) work that way. I recollect seeing somewhere (can't locate it
    right now, may have been upon install of Spampal) a dialog asking if
    Tbird should trust Spampal, which I answered yes to.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast