5 ms·
I agree with you on the spam filtering. It would be VERY nice if you could customize the threshold, or even better, have a couple of thresholds, so you end up
by tempestn 10y ago
I agree with you on the spam filtering. It would be VERY nice if you could customize the threshold, or even better, have a couple of thresholds, so you end up with a 'definitely spam' and a 'probably spam' box.
I've kind of created that by using spamassassin to filter out really hardcore spam before it gets to gmail, but obviously that's not an option if you're using an @gmail address.
That said, I think we take for granted just how good gmail's spam filtering is. Their ability to 'see' so much email passing through the system gives them a massive advantage there, which they've used to pretty good effect. They catch a ton of stuff for me that SA misses, and very few false positives (but just enough that I can't ignore the folder, unfortunately).
- vidarh 10y agoUnfortunately the false positives vary greatly with your mail patterns. For me the amount large enough that even though it also stops a shitload of spam I'm starting to think it's too much of a problem. Just checked right now, and though I've checked my spam folder earlier this month (and emptied the folder), it now has 40 messages of which 9 are false positives. What's more, several of them are from senders I regularly get e-mail from and that I have never marked as spam.
- tempestn 10y agoHa, lucky you. Before I started pre-filtering with SA, I got about 3000 spam emails per month. I can cut out about 2/3 of those with SA without losing any of the false positives, so now I only have to wade through 1000 or so to find the one or two falses. :/
- vidarh 10y agoThat brutal, but if my false positive rate was that low I'd probably be willing to just tolerate it. What drives me most crazy, is just how hard it is to get Gmail to accept that a given type of e-mail is not spam...