X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Thu Jun 18 13:33:12 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <f826636f0906171608p6268055s565f67364def3dd9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <f826636f0906171608p6268055s565f67364def3dd9@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 14:32:36 +0300
Message-ID: <6fb557d70906180432u1cfa2e23ka8d5a3937d347057@mail.gmail.com>
From: Miacek and his crime-fighting dog <miacek08@googlemail.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
X-Spam_score: -2.5
X-Spam_score_int: -24
X-Spam_bar: --
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software,
	running on the system "pakkun.mirky.net", has
	identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
	has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or
	label similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
	the administrator of that system for details.
	Content preview:  Actually, one or two messages by you (or the other
	Romanian guy) have somehow found a way to spam list, as I recently found
	out when checking what's up there. Interesting. M. On 18/06/2009, Dorin
	Cheptea <dorin.cheptea@gmail.com> wrote: > Hillock has recently noted
	an
	important feature of our email list. It > produces a lot of emails, and
	becomes increasingly difficult to follow and > organize. Just a small
	advice for those using gmail: > There is an option "Create a filter"
	(second line from top; alternatively go > to "Settings"), but you will
	have to add the email addresses of everyone of > us, not just
	folks@wikipedometer.net (which acts only as "send to", not as > "from").
	The option I chose (what to do with these emails) was to create >
	labels
	and the filters would assign labels to different messages, pending >
	from whom you received them. I made a blue label "wpm", which allows me
	very > easily to just ignore wpm-related emails in my inbox when
	necessary. I have > now 450 wpm-related conversations, some of them are
	1-message conversations, > but one was a 60-message conversation (!)
	Also, I have the option of > reviewing only wpm-labeled conversations. >
	> 183 of 450 conversations I have not bothered even to read yet (!)
	They
	> pertain to periods when I was less active. So, in case someone expects
	from > me an answer or a reaction and does not receive it, there are
	three > possibilities: 1) I am not even aware I was asked something, 2)
	I forgot I > was asked something, which for practical purposes is
	equivalent to 1, or 3) > (which is very rare, 1-2 cases only) I want to
	write a more thorough answer > and did not get to do that yet.
	Therefore
	I apologize to those that expect > (now or will in the future)
	something
	from me and don't get an answer, and > kindly ask them to remind me. > >
	Dorin > [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-2.5 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ----------------------
	--------------------------------------------------
	-2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
	0.1 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7-deb (2006-10-05) on 
	pakkun.mirky.net
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 
	autolearn=unavailable version=3.1.7-deb
Subject: Re: [WPM] do not get lost in messages
X-BeenThere: folks@wikipedometer.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
List-Id: Wikipedia statistics <folks.wikipedometer.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks>,
	<mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:folks@wikipedometer.net>
List-Help: <mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks>,
	<mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: -2.5
X-Spam_score_int: -24
X-Spam_bar: --
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "pakkun.mirky.net", has
	identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original message
	has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
	similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
	the administrator of that system for details.
	Content preview:  Actually, one or two messages by you (or the other
	Romanian guy) have somehow found a way to spam list, as I recently found
	out when checking what's up there. Interesting. M. On 18/06/2009, Dorin
	Cheptea <dorin.cheptea@gmail.com> wrote: > Hillock has recently noted an
	important feature of our email list. It > produces a lot of emails, and
	becomes increasingly difficult to follow and > organize. Just a small
	advice for those using gmail: > There is an option "Create a filter"
	(second line from top; alternatively go > to "Settings"), but you will
	have to add the email addresses of everyone of > us, not just
	folks@wikipedometer.net (which acts only as "send to", not as > "from").
	The option I chose (what to do with these emails) was to create > labels
	and the filters would assign labels to different messages, pending >
	from whom you received them. I made a blue label "wpm", which allows me
	very > easily to just ignore wpm-related emails in my inbox when
	necessary. I have > now 450 wpm-related conversations, some of them are
	1-message conversations, > but one was a 60-message conversation (!)
	Also, I have the option of > reviewing only wpm-labeled conversations. >
	> 183 of 450 conversations I have not bothered even to read yet (!) They
	> pertain to periods when I was less active. So, in case someone expects
	from > me an answer or a reaction and does not receive it, there are
	three > possibilities: 1) I am not even aware I was asked something, 2)
	I forgot I > was asked something, which for practical purposes is
	equivalent to 1, or 3) > (which is very rare, 1-2 cases only) I want to
	write a more thorough answer > and did not get to do that yet. Therefore
	I apologize to those that expect > (now or will in the future) something
	from me and don't get an answer, and > kindly ask them to remind me. > >
	Dorin > [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-2.5 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
	-2.6 BAYES_00               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
	0.1 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

Actually, one or two messages by you (or the other Romanian guy) have
somehow found a way to spam list, as I recently found out when
checking what's up there. Interesting.

M.

On 18/06/2009, Dorin Cheptea <dorin.cheptea@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hillock has recently noted an important feature of our email list. It
> produces a lot of emails, and becomes increasingly difficult to follow and
> organize. Just a small advice for those using gmail:
> There is an option "Create a filter" (second line from top; alternatively go
> to "Settings"), but you will have to add the email addresses of everyone of
> us, not just folks@wikipedometer.net (which acts only as "send to", not as
> "from"). The option I chose (what to do with these emails) was to create
> labels and the filters would assign labels to different messages, pending
> from whom you received them. I made a blue label "wpm", which allows me very
> easily to just ignore wpm-related emails in my inbox when necessary. I have
> now 450 wpm-related conversations, some of them are 1-message conversations,
> but one was a 60-message conversation (!) Also, I have the option of
> reviewing only wpm-labeled conversations.
>
> 183 of 450 conversations I have not bothered even to read yet (!) They
> pertain to periods when I was less active. So, in case someone expects from
> me an answer or a reaction and does not receive it, there are three
> possibilities: 1) I am not even aware I was asked something, 2) I forgot I
> was asked something, which for practical purposes is equivalent to 1, or 3)
> (which is very rare, 1-2 cases only) I want to write a more thorough answer
> and did not get to do that yet. Therefore I apologize to those that expect
> (now or will in the future) something from me and don't get an answer, and
> kindly ask them to remind me.
>
> Dorin
>

_______________________________________________
Wikipedia statistics discussion list
folks@wikipedometer.net
http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks

