On Wed, 10 Mar 2004, Bob George wrote:
> Alan Baxter wrote:
>
> > [...]
> >
> > Unfortunately the score of a message added to
> >the AWL includes the score subtracted/added by the whitelist/blacklist
> >command. Thus the use of a static whitelist or blacklist affects AWL
> >quite strongly.
> >
> >
> And the effect may linger long after the white/blacklist is deleted.
I wonder whether the AWL (and please, please let it be renamed!) really should
keep an average of ALL scores ever. Might it be better if it only kept, say,
a moving average of the last 5 scores, or an exponential average? Something
that would smooth out simple bumps, but wouldn't punish a person forever for
one GTUBE (or any other insanely high scoring mail). What I have in mind (not
tested at all, so it might be crazy) would be simply storing the last 5 scores
from that sender, and using their average as the AWL value. If you don't have
5 scores from that user, then you use the current message score for any missing
values (so someone who sends a +9 message followed by a -1 would have their
score adjusted as if their average were 1, instead of -9), allowing the AWL to
provide smaller adjustments until it has enough data to do something
reasonable, while still smoothing large bumps.
Just an idea.
--
Adam Lopresto
http://cec.wustl.edu/~adam/ Sorry about the crayon, they won't let me have anything sharp.