Bug #49

2 Spam threshold values in UI - fly out help text for data source source whocalled

Added by tshif almost 3 years ago. Updated almost 3 years ago.

Status:Closed Start:05/09/2009
Priority:High Due date:
Assigned to:jacobsj % Done:

70%

Category:-
Target version: Caller ID Superfecta v 2.0.0

Description

The flyout help for SPAM COUNT THRESHOLD states all providers who use spam counts will use the SPAM COUNT THRESHOLD value. However the UI still has a dedicated field for the spam threshold for WHOCALLED source. Is this redundant? Did you change whocalled to use the SPAM COUNT THRESHOLD value in general options?

Edit: Awaiting determination; Are changes required in whocalled source script? See notes:8-10


Related issues

related to Caller ID Superfecta - Feature #16: Alter whocalled behavior to return textual caller ID info as well as SPAM flag Closed 04/29/2009 05/21/2009

History

Updated by jacobsj almost 3 years ago

I'm not exactly sure how Who Called works, and the flags are different. There is a spam flag and a threshold, but they are two seperate fields. I'm not sure if the threshold is meant as a spam threshold, or a threshold for something else. If it is meant as a spam threshold, then I don't see why the fields couldn't be combined.

Updated by jacobsj almost 3 years ago

After looking at the code, the two thresholds are not used in the same way. The Who Called script is looking to see if the threshold is met before it returns a valid response, not a spam indicator. I don't think these should be combined into one field.

What should probably happen, is for someone (whoever wrote the script originally) to add comments in the UI about how the fields will be used. It also seems that you can use whocalled.us without logging in, so I'm not sure what the purpose of login information in our script is for. Perhaps someone can clarify that as well.

Updated by tshif almost 3 years ago

  • Status changed from New to Feedback
  • Priority changed from Urgent to High

Agreed. Ill ask Ward Mundy for more info about this code - I think he wrote this portion.

Updated by tshif almost 3 years ago

  • Target version changed from Caller ID Superfecta v 2.0.0 to Caller ID Superfecta v 2.1.0

Updated by tshif almost 3 years ago

  • Target version changed from Caller ID Superfecta v 2.1.0 to Caller ID Superfecta v 2.0.0

EMail sent to Ward Mundy asking for feedback and flyout help text.

Updated by tshif almost 3 years ago

  • Subject changed from 2 Spam threshold values in UI to 2 Spam threshold values in UI - fly out help text for data source source whocalled

Updated by tshif almost 3 years ago

Received email response from NerdUno. He states klingon888 wrote the whocalled portion - I have sent klingon888 an email asking for input.

Updated by klingon888 almost 3 years ago

tshif wrote:

Received email response from NerdUno. He states klingon888 wrote the whocalled portion - I have sent klingon888 an email asking for input.

Tony - Are you talking about the following :

if ($success=='1') :
if ($score>$WhoCalled_threshold) :

When you do a lookup in Whocalled (try the number below and plug in your name/pass) :

http://whocalled.us/do?action=getScore&name=$WhoCalled_name&pass=$WhoCalled_pass&phoneNumber=8662906227

it returns the following : success=1&score=193

Per the instructions at Whocalled.us, "All actions require name/pass/phoneNumber and return success=0&errorMsg=Some message or success=1"

So, if success=0 means there is an error in the lookup. I wanted to test to make sure the lookup is successful before checking the SPAM threshold, so you can basically hardcode this value.

Hope this makes sense.....Dave.

Updated by jacobsj almost 3 years ago

klingon888 wrote:

http://whocalled.us/do?action=getScore&name=$WhoCalled_name&pass=$WhoCalled_pass&phoneNumber=8662906227

it returns the following : success=1&score=193

What does the score mean? Is the score the number of calls reported as spam? Or the number of people that have reported the Caller ID as that which whocalled.us is reporting? Knowing the relevance of the score here would help here.

Updated by jacobsj almost 3 years ago

Updated by tshif almost 3 years ago

  • % Done changed from 0 to 70

Updated by tshif almost 3 years ago

  • Status changed from Feedback to Closed

This code seems to be performing as expected. Jeremy if you prefer to make changes - just reopen this ticket - otherwise, I say we go with it.

Also available in: Atom PDF