|
FastMail Forum All posts relating to FastMail.FM should go here: suggestions, comments, requests for help, complaints, technical issues etc. |
|
Thread Tools |
14 Jun 2010, 04:41 AM | #1 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 25
|
Frustrated - non-spam continually reported as spam
I have a paid account with a Bayes status of
Num spam learned 2827since I cleared it several months ago, following a suggestion on this forum. So, let's just suppose I get not one, but two daily emails I want from Casey Research. Because the Fastmail spam filter refuses to change its evil ways no matter how many times (just for the record, twice per day) I "report non-spam," I can rest assured the next day I'll have to go into the Junk Mail folder to find the daily emails. I mentioned it to the senders, and they said to whitelist them. Which of course is only possible in Fastmail if you insist on getting emails only from people on your address book list. Not practical for me. And then I should mention that I have several rules defined telling Fastmail to put mail from Casey or Casey Research or (____) into the IN box. Still, every day, I have to fish them out of junk mail. (pobox.com, looking for a new customer?) |
14 Jun 2010, 04:53 AM | #2 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 11
|
If you have your spam filter settings on "Normal," this is part of what happens:
Quote:
|
|
14 Jun 2010, 05:04 AM | #3 |
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 8,687
|
|
15 Jun 2010, 03:50 PM | #4 |
Essential Contributor
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 280
|
The "define rules" screen has gotten a lot more powerful over the years but it still doesn't provide as much explicit control (such as determining exactly when the spam score is tested) or support as complex rule sets as a custom sieve script. You might also find the Fastmail Sieve Tester an easier way to debug why a message didn't get handled correctly.
https://www.fastmail.fm/help/managin...ced_rules.html http://wiki.fastmail.fm/index.php?title=SieveFAQ |
15 Jun 2010, 09:58 PM | #5 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 25
|
Quote:
Too clever for my own good, am I? Thanks for the suggestion. I have added the forwarded sneakemail address and we shall see, maņana.... |
|
15 Jun 2010, 09:59 PM | #6 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 25
|
|
15 Jun 2010, 10:03 PM | #7 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 25
|
Quote:
|
|
16 Jun 2010, 04:46 AM | #8 | |
Essential Contributor
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 280
|
Quote:
Why not sign up for a couple of yahoo groups or google groups with a lot of activity where you configure it to send you a email for every single posting, rather than a day or weekly digest. That should give you a lot of good email messages within a couple of days. You could create a filter to automatically move all of those messages to a dedicated folder to make it easy to ignore them. After you get enough mail to activate your personal bayes database quit the groups. See http://www.fastmail.fm/help/spam_virus_protection.html |
|
17 Jun 2010, 03:57 AM | #9 |
Cornerstone of the Community
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 545
|
Or if you've kept a file of old good email, report those as non-spam, even if you have to upload them from your computer to FM. I'm pretty that old non-spam is almost as good as new non-spam for this purpose. (Old spam isn't as good as new spam because spam characteristics change over time.)
Using a mailing list will work to build up your numbers, but I would suggest only using it to reach 200 (if you don't have any other email you can use) and then stopping. Distinguishing spam from non-spam depends on statistical analysis of your email (spam and non), and your own personal email probably does not have the same statistical profile as what's in the mailing list. For this reason, I am currently whitelisting my mailing lists and NOT reporting them as non-spam, leaving the statistical analysis with the narrower problem of distinguishing my personal email from spam. If you use the mailing list technique, at least choose lists on topics you might correspond about in normal email. Edward |
20 Jun 2010, 03:55 AM | #10 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 25
|
Quote:
|
|
20 Jun 2010, 04:00 AM | #11 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 25
|
One other thing - I had 126 non-spams in the database before joining three Yahoo groups and quickly adding 3 more non-spam. End result: I have 126 non-spam...is there some kind of time lag in the database updating?
|
20 Jun 2010, 04:23 AM | #12 |
Cornerstone of the Community
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 545
|
The "spam learning" does statistics on the content of the message, so you can report as many as you want from a mailing list.
IIRC the database is updated daily, so it's not surprising that you didn't see your count increase immediately. Edward |
20 Jun 2010, 11:47 AM | #13 |
Intergalactic Postmaster
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Irving, Texas
Posts: 8,916
|
Fine-tuning spam filtering and address book whitelisting
There are several ways to improve your situation. Here are some points to consider:
Bill |
21 Jun 2010, 03:59 PM | #14 |
Cornerstone of the Community
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The Village
Posts: 599
|
OK, so.... I'm an enhanced user, I have my spam protection set to "normal", and I've wondered why a certain vendor I receive periodic mails from is constantly rated as spam even though I always choose "report non-spam" for them (their stuff is kinda spammy in nature, but since it's a company I've dealt with, it's not spam to me...)
I'm certain that soon after the personal Bayes filtering was implemented I checked that I was using it and knew that I was training my database... I should have reached the 200 mark a LONG, long time ago.... but this thread made me go back and look and.... lo and behold, for my Bayes status I have.... ZERO learned for both spam and non-spam, and using the Global database! What kinda crap is this? How did this get turned off? |
23 Jun 2010, 02:50 AM | #15 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Bessel Free Luna
Posts: 6
|
Me three
NumberSix-
I, too, just noticed that as a paid user who used to have nice high numbers on his Bayes DB status, I have reverted to Zeroes and 'Global' DB use. I also note that manually training it (reporting spam/non-spam) doesn't move those zeroes. I suspect a bug; I've filed a req. with support asking them whassup. Will report back on what they tell me. -Sierran |
Thread Tools | |
|
|