Am 25.11.2010 14:11, schrieb JMGross: > > ----- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ----- > Von: Peter Bigot > Gesendet am: 16 Nov 2010 18:35:28 > >> 1) I propose to change the list management so that email to it from people >> who are not subscribed is immediately bounced (saying that the list requires >> subscription for posting), rather than put into a pending bucket where Chris >> or I have to look at it. If it's worth our time to read, it's worth the >> sender's time to subscribe so they can see responses. > >> 2) Anybody who subscribes from an address that implements a screening filter >> like Boxbe so that mail to the list results in a request to add yourself to >> the recipient's "Guest List" will be summarily unsubscribed. Maybe I'll >> send an email saying why. I won't bother to add myself to your guest list >> to tell you that it's happened. Manage your spam without inconveniencing >> me, thank you very much. > >> Comments on either of these? > > Some. While most in the list agreed to these proposals (and I can see the > benefits), it has some drawbacks too: > > 1) Personally, I us a different mail account for this list than for normal > mail. it keeps the list mail in its own channel. > Since the mail is supposed to appear in the list and therefor is received > again, I usually don't save a local copy. > Using a webmailer or accessing the account from an internet cafe forbids > storage of sent mails too.
No. The list is driven by Mailman, so you can subscribe with all your accounts that you need to post from and set all but one to "nomail" mode, i. e. you can post because you're subscribed, but you don't receive copies. Your webmailer should offer the opportunity to save local copies anyways, such as Auto-Bcc, sent folders, or thereabouts. And IMNSHO, many webmailers are broken in that, for instance, they break threading. Messages with Re:, but without In-Reply-To:/References: headers should be rejected, too. Your messages don't usually appear threaded but start new threads. This is a nuisance. > But sometiem sit happens that I accidentally send the mail from the wrong > account. It is your responsibility to keep track of your accounts. > If it gets bounced in the (nowadays) usual way, that means without an > unquoted copy of the original mail text, > the mail is lost. This is rather uncommon. > So if it is bounced, please bounce it with the original, unaltered and not > packaged (as attachment or whatever) content, so one can re-send it from the > right account > without too much hassle. > > Also, one thing I rellay dislike these days is the neccessity to register > ones mail address everywhere. > Here, I'm registered user, but on my journey through the net I often find > questions about this and that > (including MSP) and I'd really like to answer, but then I had to register to > this forum, so I just wander away. > > Forcing people to register to the mailing list will repel all people who want > to use mspgcc and have a question, > but don't want to marry the list. But that's exactly what keeps quality reasonable. Anonymous posting allows for random ranting, and random half-wisdom spread around, and it's - for the list regulars - a major effort to get that overcome. > 2) While I completely undestand why you want this, it also exposes a problem. > Those systems are there not for fun or > to make your life more difficult, but (usually) in a deliberate attempt to > fight spam. (even if some abuse the mechanism > for their own marketing). Their number is increasing. > Generally forbidding those behind such a system access to the mailing list is > like asking people to turn off their virus scanner > before accessing your web site or something similar. Not at all. It exposes several technical problems of these "anti-spam" systems. 1 - forged senders can make these systems take part in a distributed denial of service attack 2 - automated mailers of any kind are supposed to send to the envelope sender, not to the From: address. The envelope sender is set to the list processing software. I routinely ask that challenge-response systems that challenge the From: address on lists be permanently banned from the list. 3 - challenge-response systems need to allow whitelisting mailing lists in order to be useful. If they don't, they aren't up to their task and should be deinstalled. > Also, what about people who have a mail responder (because of temporary > absence) on their mail address? It will spam the list > (already happened several time). Will you also automatically unsubscribe > them? Again, this is supposed to send to the envelope sender, and since list mail can be recognized from mail headers, these vacation responders are supposed to STFU and not send anything. > Isn't a filter on the mailing list side the better solution? No need. Just because some technical systems offered to users haven't arrived in the 21st century yet doesn't mean that list operators and users with modern software should jump hoops or put up with antediluvian habits. > Yes, things are getting more and more complicated, and maintaining a list > sometimes is hard work. A work I really appreciate. > But a list that forbids almost everything is pretty much useless. It allows plain text posting by subscribers, so what's the point? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App & Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base & get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Mspgcc-users mailing list Mspgcc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users
