<div><div><br>Hi Paul: <br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Here is a potential proposal that would solve this problem, and not require the filters to be run twice
<br><br>1) Make it possible to have a plugin return the fact that some state has been persisted.<br>2) Set this as a property of the comment.<br>3) If one of the following plugins wants to delete the comment, it will call the Delete() method.
<br>4) In this method it checks to see if the "something has been persisted" bit and doesn't actually delete the comment, but just hides it.</blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
An alternative to this is to have the comment keep a reference to the filters that have persisted something. In the delete method, before the comment is deleted, all of the filters are given a chance to clean up their state.
</blockquote><div><br></div>Why can't we just put the bayesian filter in last order? it seems solve this problem easier.<br><br>Mark<br></div><br>