Poll: How big is your training.dat?
Chris Ilias
Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
--
Chris Ilias
mozilla.test.multimedia moderator
Mozilla links <http://ilias.ca>
(Please do not email me tech support questions)
clay
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
596 KB
--
100% money back guarantee!
If at any time you are dissatisfied with the performance of your Mozilla
product, feel free to return it for a complete refund of what you paid
for it...
Graham Coward
> Chris Ilias wrote:
>> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
>> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
>> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>>
>> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
>> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>>
>> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
>
> 596 KB
>
--
Please reply to group or
reply "off-group" by removing the two "z"s from my e-mail address.
Graham Coward
Melbourne, Australia
=====================
Coward Family History Web Site
http://www.alphalink.com.au/~coward/
gwtc
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
--
Maxims for the Internet Age: In Gates we trust.
ALan Holley
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
Brian J. Graham
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
2.54MB ...and it works flawlessly. :)
--
Brian
. http://www.mozilla.org | http://ilias.ca/mozilla/ | http://ilias.ca/
. No keyboard found. Press F1 to continue.
. Internet "Help" Desk: http://www.deadtroll.com/video/helldeskcable.html
Large Allen
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
HMMMmmm... no such file.
Could this be why I keep getting lots of junk mail??
Ken Wagner
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
475K
Paul Nourie
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
76K ... 4 weeks old checking (2) accounts.
Ron K.
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
8.44 MB since TB had it's first Junk filter.
--
Ron K.
Don't be a fonted, it's just type casting.
Tonya Marshall
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
Skree
Apparently I have two profile folders - both named the same but in
different locations.
One is where I moved it two following instructions on the mozilla page
that talks about moving profiles. This one contains all my current mail
and stuff but no training.dat file.
on my C:\ drive under userdocs apps data thunderbird, there exists
another profile folder of the same name in contains different files -
including the training.dat. It is only 5Kb.
--
from the bottom of the Rockpile
Snorkelson MacBurp
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
1.9MB
FWIW, JMC it hasn't worked worth a pinch of shit since I upgraded to
1.5. It used to work essentially flawlessly, (well over 99%) but since
the upgrade, it catches maybe 66%. Kind of sucky, to say the least.
PS. Belak will save the Leafs.
The Real Bev
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
2.36 meg.
--
Cheers, Bev (Happy Linux User #85683, Slackware 10.2)
=========================================================
"Life is actually fair. It just doesn't seem to be common
knowledge that 'fair' sometimes sucks." -- Jim Cook
Chuck Anderson
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
>
--
*****************************
Chuck Anderson • Boulder, CO
http://www.CycleTourist.com
*****************************
Mumia W.
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
For TB, which I only used for about one week: 7k.
For SM, which I've used for about a month: 26k.
Basil Chupin
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
3,073,148 bytes big - and growing.
Cheers.
--
This computer is environment-friendly and is running on OpenSuSE 10.1
Moz Champion (Dan)
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
84K with a catch ration of 98.7%
false positives >1% (last month)
You dont need a big training.dat
Bernie
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
7,193KB
tim
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
clay
> Chris Ilias wrote:
>> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
>> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size;
>> and need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>>
>> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
>> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>>
>> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
>
> 596 KB
>
can't find it on my Linux box.
12 KB on 2k box (seldom used)
n/a on 2k box (not activated)
760 KB on XPP box
Bob Henson
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
994 Kb
Regards,
Bob
--
Remove "x" from address to reply by email.
Basil Chupin
In linux it's in your /home/<your-logon-name>/.thunderbird/xxxx.default
directory.
goodwin
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
826 mg
goodwin
oops - 826 kb (807 really)
Roland de Ruiter
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
--
Regards,
Roland
Alex
137 KB
However, I use gmail's junk filter & so actually receive very few junk
mails in TB.
--
Alex
Melchert Fruitema
> in all 30 accounts I have each one is 0 kb!
--
Kind regards,
Melchert
MacOS 10.3.9/Firefox 1.5/Thunderbird 1.5
Melchert Fruitema
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size;
> and need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
Mnenhy Junk Filter Statistics indicates that the filter was trained by
761 messages, of which 15% were non-junk. (Note that block lists are
used by ISP to filter spam in my main account mail box.)
I understand pruning to mean trimming. Do you know if the development is
also aimed at cleaning the training data from attempts of contamination
by spammers ? There were javascripts around to accomplish that in the
past. Will have to dig to find them.
Herb
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
1.4 MB
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
NA
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
231 KB
Peter
2472 KB
David Pyles
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
Dave Pyles
J.B. Nicholson-Owens
> In linux it's in your /home/<your-logon-name>/.thunderbird/xxxx.default
> directory.
On Ubuntu GNU/Linux (perhaps any Debian GNU/Linux derivative?) the Thunderbird
directory is in ~/.mozilla-thunderbird.
Mine is 6.6MB right now.
RAV
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
7,634 bytes in my office installation, where I almost never use it for
E-mail and almost always for newsgroups. Will have to check at my home
installation where I use it for E-mail. p
rohrmann
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
259 KB
John McWilliams
But, how the heck does it work? Heres a few lines from mine.
they
Tim Bushell
Mine ranks in at 84 KB. Although, I have to admit that I just recently
started using the Junk Mail controls more in Thunderbird.
Jan Steffen
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
556 KB now and 404 KB in an 3 month old backup I found.
I use the junk filter with 3 mail accounts and it works very good.
HTH, Jan
Ulrich Boche
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size;
> and need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
--
Ulrich
Ulrich Boche
> HMMMmmm... no such file.
> Could this be why I keep getting lots of junk mail??
Probably. Look at "Tools -> Junk Mail Controls", select the tab
"Adaptive Filter" and put a check mark in the box "Enable adaptive junk
mail detection".
This won't relieve you of all junk mail right away. You need to train
the adaptive filter by marking all junk mail that gets into your inbox
as Junk. Over time, the filter will get better and more of the unwanted
junk will land in the Junk folder right away.
--
Ulrich
The Real Bev
Why would we want to delete one and start over? Is there any point in
trying to control its size? Why? I would guess that its size is
dependent on how long it's been running and how much spam you get. Mine
has been running since I started using firefox (maybe a year) and I get
something like 300 pieces of junk in 4 accounts every day, the bulk of
it in one account that I'm thinking of killing.
--
Cheers, Bev (Happy Linux User #85683, Slackware 10.2)
===================================================================
Teamwork: A bunch of people running around doing what I tell them.
Moz Champion (Dan)
> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>
>> Chris Ilias wrote:
>>> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
>>> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size;
>>> and need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>>>
>>> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
>>> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>>>
>>> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
>>
>> 84K with a catch ration of 98.7%
>> false positives >1% (last month)
>>
>> You dont need a big training.dat
>
> Why would we want to delete one and start over? Is there any point in
> trying to control its size? Why? I would guess that its size is
> dependent on how long it's been running and how much spam you get. Mine
> has been running since I started using firefox (maybe a year) and I get
> something like 300 pieces of junk in 4 accounts every day, the bulk of
> it in one account that I'm thinking of killing.
>
Did I say that? No, I didnt. I simply said you dont need a big
training.dat for JMC to be successful.
If you start having problems perhaps you might consider starting over,
but if JMC is working fine, why bother? My experience is that JMC takes
but a couple of weeks to get up to speed anyway
Arne Hamre
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
come close to my inbox.
--
Arne
The Real Bev
> The Real Bev wrote:
>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>> You dont need a big training.dat
>>
>> Why would we want to delete one and start over? Is there any point in
>> trying to control its size? Why? I would guess that its size is
>> dependent on how long it's been running and how much spam you get. Mine
>> has been running since I started using firefox (maybe a year) and I get
>> something like 300 pieces of junk in 4 accounts every day, the bulk of
>> it in one account that I'm thinking of killing.
>
> Did I say that? No, I didnt. I simply said you dont need a big
> training.dat for JMC to be successful.
To me, that implied that we have some control over the size and that
there was no point in having a large one. Never mind.
> If you start having problems perhaps you might consider starting over,
> but if JMC is working fine, why bother? My experience is that JMC takes
> but a couple of weeks to get up to speed anyway
--
Cheers, Bev (Happy Linux User #85683, Slackware 10.2)
---------------------------------------
That's my opinion. Ought to be yours.
clay
so it is...
wonder why gnome-search-tool didn't find it (but locate did?)
I ran updatedb before searching.
60 KB
clay
indeed it is. I found it anyway. thanks
Alain
I receive a prety large variety of SPAM, in at least 4 languages beside English
and French. (Rusian, Greek/Cyrilic, Japanese/Chinese, German,...)
Alain
Anne Hollingshead
Anne
Alain wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> support-thunderbird mailing list
> support-t...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-thunderbird
>
>
Moz Champion (Dan)
Please bottom-post in these newsgroups if you will, that is, quote
previous messages (or portions thereof) then write your reply, such as I
have done, thank you for your consideration in this matter
http://www.mozilla.org/community/etiquette.html refers
No, you dont have to do anything unless you are experiencing problems
with Junk Mail Controls
There are other here with training.dat files in the megabyte range
Anne Hollingshead
Anne
Ron Hunter
Wow, mine is only 577k! But then I filter most spam before TB ever sees it.
Moz Champion (Dan)
Only 124K here, still catching 99.8 percent of spam, and I dont filter
gwtc
> Only 124K here, still catching 99.8 percent of spam, and I dont filter
sure you do. You're using the jmc aren't you? Well, thats a filter.
--
EVERYTHING HAS A GENDER
You may not know this but many nonliving things have a gender...
Ziploc Bags are Male, because they hold everything in, but you can see
right through them.
Moz Champion (Dan)
> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>
>> Only 124K here, still catching 99.8 percent of spam, and I dont filter
> sure you do. You're using the jmc aren't you? Well, thats a filter.
>
The "I dont filter' was with regard to the previous post
which said
"Wow, mine is only 577k! But then I filter most spam before TB ever
sees it."
So my 'I dont filter' comment was obviously intended as I dont filter
spam before TB sees it.
Taken in context, it makes sense.
Ron Hunter
> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>
>> Only 124K here, still catching 99.8 percent of spam, and I dont filter
> sure you do. You're using the jmc aren't you? Well, thats a filter.
>
He only gets 'generic' junk. Keeps the junk definition file small. Grin.
Moz Champion (Dan)
And JMC is catching 98% and better of it!
Atari
joe...@gmail.com
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
> Chris Ilias
> mozilla.test.multimedia moderator
> Mozilla links <http://ilias.ca>
> (Please do not email me tech support questions)
1.4 megs. I trained it on an account that had been mostly collecting
spam before my school implemented effective junk mail controls.
Unfortunately, it seems spam content has shifted a bit since then, and
so TB as a second-layer defense isn't quite as good.
--Joel
Wilf
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
pretty ineffectual for some reason - I've used it for a long time yet it
still comes up with many false negatives (fewer false positives). I use
K9 which is a Bayesian filter and it is brilliant, hardly ever coming up
with a false positive or negative. I know that TB is supposed to work
in more or less the same way as K9 does so why it is ineffective for me
when K9 is good I have never been able to figure out.
Anyway, FWIW, my training.dat, just before I turned off TB's spam
filter, was 3921KB
--
Wilf
Moz Champion (Dan)
Well, my JMC is catching over 98% of spam sent my way, and previous
incarnations of JMC were quite similar in their catch ratios as well. My
training.dat is now 128K (thats up from 84K on the first of August)
All I do is mark those that are Junk as Junk and unmark those that are
caught but arent of course.
JMC should do as well as your K9
Wilf
--
Wilf
Wilf
had held back as Spam (and all *are* spam). K9 detected all but 2. JMC
detected all but 31. You can still argue that JMC has detected almost
97% which looks pretty good. But K9 has detected 99.8%.
--
Wilf
Phil Randal
> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>> JMC should do as well as your K9
>>
> Yes, I know, but for some reason it just doesn't :-(
I'll second that.
About half the jumk mail goes straight into my inbox, even though I
rigorously train.
My traning.dat is now 9MB.
Phil
Moz Champion (Dan)
Perceptions are always difficult. I base my percentages on actual
receipts - comparing how many are actually caught by JMC and how many
are missed. Is your assessment of JMC's performance based on perception
or hard data?
If based on hard data, then I would suggest that perhaps it time to
ditch your training.dat file (which is THIRTY times the size of mine)
and start anew. While this may result in a 65% catch ration temporarily
(JMC starts out at about a 65% ratio 'out of the box' for me), this
should improve rapidly to 95 percent or better with two to three weeks.
Once more, all I do is mark those that are Junk as Junk, and unmark any
JMC catches that are not. I recommend keeping a 'holding' folder (Junk
will do just fine for that), so you can monitor your catch ratio, as
well as watch for false positives.
I use the Personal Address Book exemption rule (if sender is in my
Personal Address Book JMC wont check the message)
Moz Champion (Dan)
You are complaining about a 97% catch rate?
Moz Champion (Dan)
Well, his catch rate is 97%, so I really dont know what he is
complaining about. If yours is 50%, and your training.dat is 9mb, then I
suggest you are a prime candidate to throw it out and start over again.
What do you have to lose except your spam?
Wilf
Well, maybe I'll give that a go, but it's still the case that K9 traps
nearly 100% and JMC about 97%. There aren't many false negatives,
though, so the PAB rule is unlikely to help much if at all.
--
Wilf
Moz Champion (Dan)
You are complaining about a 97% catch ratio?
The difference between k9 and JMC is 1.3 percent! Statiscally speaking
thats a normal varience and can be expected between even instances of K9
to K9 or JMC to JMC.
Wilf
>
> You are complaining about a 97% catch ratio?
> The difference between k9 and JMC is 1.3 percent! Statiscally speaking
> thats a normal varience and can be expected between even instances of K9
> to K9 or JMC to JMC.
No, all I'm saying is why settle for what JMC can do when K9 can do
better? And it's almost 3% - 96.9% and 99.8%. In any case my question
was why, if JMC and K9 do more or less the same thing, does K9 appear to
be better. And however often I compare these facilities, K9 *always*
seems to come out better. And in 1000 spam emails, 30 false negatives
seems a lot even if it is only 3%. If I were asked by someone which
facility to choose which should I say? Only, the TB junk mail filter
is easier to set up initially admittedly because K9 requires a manual
configuration to its pop3 proxy. Also, K9 can't handle SSL pop3 emails
so if you use gmail, TB would be more useful.
--
Wilf
Moz Champion (Dan)
Even a 3% variance is within the norms. Even k9 to k9 could show that
difference and more. And with spam samples it could mean one message not
caught.
I am still amazed that you complain about a 97% catch ratio.
Wilf
tell me why I should change over from a facility that's currently giving
me 99.8 percent, though.
--
Wilf
Moz Champion (Dan)
No one said you should. But remember, next year, you may find the
percentages reversed - doesnt mean one is better than the other, just
that for that particular sample, one performed marginally better. Since
you seem to prefer K9, perhaps you are more consistent with its training
than you are with JMC training. Your difference in the two could be a
difference of two spams - you trained K9 with them, but didnt in JMC?
A variance of 3 % is not statiscally important enough to claim any
distinct difference in the two products. Your version of K9 might be
better 'trained' than someone elses version of K9 and show the same
variance as you show with JMC. Variances of up to 5 to 8% are possible
even between versions of JMC - it all depends on the training.
And as this poll would tend to show (imho) size of training.dat doesnt
necessarily indicate performance
Regardless, no one said you have to stick with JMC if K9 is working as
well (or better) - but even you yourself said JMC is easier to set up.
Wilf
running K9 as well. I flag those messages which K9 thinks are spam but
let JMC decide what it thinks is spam so that I can compare the two
visually. We shall see.
--
Wilf
gwtc
--
EVERYTHING HAS A GENDER
You may not know this but many nonliving things have a gender...
A Tire is Male, because it goes bald and it's often over-inflated.
Thanos
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
People in this thread mention that the JMC catch ratio is 97%, 96.7% or
whatever. How do you determine the catch ratio?
By the way... my training.dat is 29 KB. :-)
gwtc
it from the jigger, then divide by the do-hicky, and add on a few
yoctoseconds and you get your answer.
sorry, I couldn't resist.
Thanos
> Thanos wrote:
>> People in this thread mention that the JMC catch ratio is 97%, 96.7% or
>> whatever. How do you determine the catch ratio?
>>
>> By the way... my training.dat is 29 KB. :-)
> they take the equation, multiply it by the thing-ma-bobber, subtract
> it from the jigger, then divide by the do-hicky, and add on a few
> yoctoseconds and you get your answer.
>
> sorry, I couldn't resist.
Probably i'm missing something really obvious...
gwtc
spam [lets say 30], divide that by the total number of messages
received [lets say 1,000], then multiply by 100
SO: 30/1000 = 0.03 x 100 = 3%
or take the total number of caught messages 970/1000 x 100 = 97%
success rate.
Thanos
> Thanos wrote:
>> gwtc wrote:
>>> Thanos wrote:
>>>> People in this thread mention that the JMC catch ratio is 97%, 96.7%
>>>> or whatever. How do you determine the catch ratio?
>>>>
>>>> By the way... my training.dat is 29 KB. :-)
>>> they take the equation, multiply it by the thing-ma-bobber, subtract
>>> it from the jigger, then divide by the do-hicky, and add on a few
>>> yoctoseconds and you get your answer.
>>>
>>> sorry, I couldn't resist.
>> Probably i'm missing something really obvious...
> yes, it is. You take the number of messages that were not caught as
> spam [lets say 30], divide that by the total number of messages
> received [lets say 1,000], then multiply by 100
>
> SO: 30/1000 = 0.03 x 100 = 3%
>
> or take the total number of caught messages 970/1000 x 100 = 97%
> success rate.
All right gwtc! Now i see your point! I certainly don't count the total
messages nor the junk mails I received since starting using JMC. I
thought that somehow JMC had a way of calculating the catch ratio and i
was actually asking how to tell JMC to display these values.
gwtc
Bob Williams
> Chris Ilias wrote:
>> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
>> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size;
>> and need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>>
>> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>>
110.1kb
--
Bob
Ekko Dieleman
I use K9 also and my overall accuracy is only 91 % over 100 days (33 mails
a day). Am I doing something wrong or is it just bad luck ?
Ekko
--
The Real Bev
I get ~350 spam/day, of which perhaps 30-50 get past JMC into my inbox.
I mark every single one as spam. My training.dat is 2.5 meg and is
perhaps a year old. I see the same messages (something about Viktoria
comes to mind...) over and over again and can only get rid of them by
adding another entry to my 'spam' filter for that account.
Would I benefit from starting over?
--
Cheers, Bev (Happy Linux User #85683, Slackware 10.2)
--------------------------------------------------------------
"Never keep up with the Joneses. Drag them down to your level.
It's cheaper." -- Quentin Crisp 1908 - 1999
gwtc
> Phil Randal wrote:
>
>> Wilf wrote:
>>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>
>>>> JMC should do as well as your K9
>>>>
>>> Yes, I know, but for some reason it just doesn't :-(
>>
>> I'll second that.
>>
>> About half the jumk mail goes straight into my inbox, even though I
>> rigorously train.
>>
>> My traning.dat is now 9MB.
>
> I get ~350 spam/day, of which perhaps 30-50 get past JMC into my inbox.
> I mark every single one as spam. My training.dat is 2.5 meg and is
> perhaps a year old. I see the same messages (something about Viktoria
> comes to mind...) over and over again and can only get rid of them by
> adding another entry to my 'spam' filter for that account.
>
> Would I benefit from starting over?
>
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
> Phil Randal wrote:
>
>> Wilf wrote:
>>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>
>>>> JMC should do as well as your K9
>>>>
>>> Yes, I know, but for some reason it just doesn't :-(
>>
>> I'll second that.
>>
>> About half the jumk mail goes straight into my inbox, even though I
>> rigorously train.
>>
>> My traning.dat is now 9MB.
>
> I get ~350 spam/day, of which perhaps 30-50 get past JMC into my inbox.
> I mark every single one as spam. My training.dat is 2.5 meg and is
> perhaps a year old. I see the same messages (something about Viktoria
> comes to mind...) over and over again and can only get rid of them by
> adding another entry to my 'spam' filter for that account.
>
> Would I benefit from starting over?
>
Sounds like you need to interest your ISP to install SpamAssassin and
configure RBL's for incoming mail. My mail server rejects over 8,000 per
day for a little over 100 customers.
--
Jay Garcia Netscape/Mozilla Champion
UFAQ - http://www.UFAQ.org
Wilf
I have always been "lucky" with K9, I guess.
--
Wilf
Ekko Dieleman
OK. So bad luck after all. For the record: I use TB 1.5.0.5 on XP Home
SP2. My training.dat is 1433 KB. My provider also has a spam filter in
place so I don't get that much spam. The last time I looked in my spam
mailbox it catched 100 spam messages a day. K9 catches 5 spam mails per
day on average. JMC catches 1 spam mail per day on average.
Ekko
--
Moz Champion (Dan)
You dont have to count the total messsages since you started using JMC.
Simply decide on a 'time frame' to use. I suggest a week. Compare the
number of spam messages receieved in the week, to the number caught by JMC.
You can do it on a daily basis, but those results can vary dramatically
day by day, a weekly period averages things out a little
The Real Bev
This is from my myrealbox.com account, which I used to post for a long
time and which is just a sort of testbed for Novell and we're lucky we
can set up filters at the website. My gmail accounts are relatively
spam-free thanks to google's tender ministrations, and the
really-private account on my son's server gets NO spam.
I retrained the filter right after I posted this last night. For some
reason spammers seem to take the weekend off ("Hey, we got families
too!"), but the percentage of spam making it into the inbox seems to
have dropped considerably. We'll see...
I'd already created a 60-entry spam filter which sees whatever hasn't
been previously siphoned off.
--
Cheers, Bev (Happy Linux User #85683, Slackware 10.2)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
As the shopper placed her groceries on the checkout stand, the
bagger asked "Paper or plastic?" "Doesn't matter," she replied,
"I'm bisackual."
Thanos
As you say, it won't be 100% accurate result, since the results may vary
even between weeks.
Anyway, as i mentioned i thought that JMC did that calculation and i was
asking how to dig those results. I never intended to count the junk
messages! Thanks anyway...
RAV
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size; and
> need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
1.6 megs on my home PC where I use it for E-mail (is 7,634 bytes on my
office PC, where I almost never use it for E-mail and almost always for
newsgroups).
Pete Holsberg
6,134,756 bytes
--
Pete Holsberg
Columbus, NJ
To be able under all circumstances to practice five things
constitutes perfect virtue; these five things are gravity,
generosity of soul, sincerity, earnestness and kindness....
--Confucius
squaredancer
to generate the following:? :
> Thunderbird developers are looking into adding code which prunes the
> Junk Mail Control training filter when it gets over a certain size;
> and need to get an idea of how big the average training file is.
>
> The file is called training.dat, and it resides in your profile folder.
> See <http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/profile>
>
> If you still don't know how to find it, don't worry. :-)
just run out of bandwidth on this (useless??) thread....
reg