[pLog-svn] r6088 - plog/branches/lifetype-1.2/class/security

Jon Daley plogworld at jon.limedaley.com
Thu Nov 29 23:48:53 EST 2007

On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Mark Wu wrote:
> Why can't we just put the bayesian filter in last order? it seems solve this
> problem easier.
 	Does that fix everything?  It is certainly the easiest (coding and 
performance) wise.
 	With my thinking it seems like that fixes it - at least for now, 
because we don't have any other plugins that would use the inputs of 
others.  And we can maybe do Mark's priority idea if we ever need that 
sort of thing.
 	As long as it works for Paul's stuff, I think that sounds good. 
So, then we should take Mark's rev 6088 or whatever it is and use that, 
but modify it to pass in the previouslyRejected flag, and then put the 
bayesian at the end.

> BTW,  most lifetype installations in CJK site does rely on Bayesian 
> Filter to protect the spam attack. Because the tokenize algorithm can't 
> separate CJK into each atomic token. We don't use stop words and "white 
> space" to seperate a paragraph into "word".
 	I am not sure what you are saying.  It seems like you are saying 
the tokenizer doesn't work, so then it seems that the bayesian filter 
wouldn't be very good at all...

 	Well, it's been 10 minutes since I read your idea of simply 
putting the bayesian filter at the end, and haven't come up with a reason 
why it won't work.  So, probably good.  Do you want to do it, or me?

Jon Daley

Whenever people agree with me I always feel I must be wrong.
-- Oscar Wilde

More information about the pLog-svn mailing list