[RCD] junk processing flow needs two Junk folders, not just one

Peter Overtoom ps.overtoom at redheadtech.nl
Sun Feb 26 09:49:06 CET 2012


Would it not be a better idea to use only 1 junk folder and use another
indicator for user identied spam and system identified spam? I think this
will be more clear for the user.

On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Brian J. Murrell <brian at interlinx.bc.ca>wrote:

> I hope you will indulge this posting to the dev list as it really is
> more a dev matter than a using matter.  I was going to file a bug about
> this but I thought it warranted some discussion first.
>
> My issue is with how Junk is handled in conjunction with the
> markasjunk[2?] plugin(s).
>
> As you know, with the markasjunk plugin, when you press the junk button
> it moves the mail message to the $rcmail_config['junk_mbox'] (i.e. Junk
> by default).
>
> But that does not recognize that there are two types of junk: the mail
> that the mail system determined is spam (let's call this tagged spam)
> and wants to quarantine for the user to sift through for false
> positives[1].  The other type of "Junk" is the spam that the mail system
> did not determine for the user (let's call this untagged spam) and that
> the user wants to tell the mail system is spam so that it can learn.
>
> So the user needs two folders for these different types of messages, for
> a couple of reasons.  First reason is that it's a waste of the users
> time to put the untagged spam into the same folder that is meant to be
> the folder that the user to sifts through to find falsely tagged spam.
> Secondly, the user does need a folder to put untagged spam so that the
> mail system has somewhere it can go get messages that the user wants it
> to use to learn about what spam is.  And this folder shouldn't be same
> folder that the tagged spam has gotten put into since we don't want/need
> the mail system to learn from messages it's already tagged as spam.
>
> On my system here those two folders are "Junk" and "spam"
> (respectively).  Mail that has the X-Spam-Flag header set to "YES" is
> put into "Junk" (and does not need to be used to learn about spam from)
> and messages that are in the user's INBOX that are actually spam should
> be moved to "spam".  A process on the mail system goes through the
> "spam" folders of all of the users and pushes those messages through the
> spam-learning process.
>
> Am I going about this all wrong?  Does anyone else see the need for two
> different folders (three if you bring the "ham" into the discussion) for
> spam processing?
>
> Cheers,
> b.
>
> [1] One must have one of these folders lest risk throwing out the
> occasional non-spam message without the user's consent/knowledge.  This
> is where the user goes to look for that message that somebody says they
> sent but that the user never received.
>
>
>
>
>  --- 8< --- detachments --- 8< ---
>  The following attachments have been detached and are available for
> viewing.
>  http://detached.gigo.com/rc/Eq/Uv9TvoDD/signature.asc
>  Only click these links if you trust the sender, as well as this message.
>  --- 8< --- detachments --- 8< ---
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> List info: http://lists.roundcube.net/dev/
> BT/0bf96065
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.roundcube.net/pipermail/dev/attachments/20120226/06dbc206/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
List info: http://lists.roundcube.net/dev/
BT/aba52c80


More information about the Dev mailing list