> >I'll say it again... I think the list should accept posts only from its > >members. > > No. > > If you lack the skill or will to setup your own filtering go somewhere else. It's not a matter of "skill or will" - it's famously difficult to filter spam effectively, as you should know if you've been doing email for a while. As for "go somewhere else," yeah...just tell people to go away, and eventually you lose folks who could make significant contributions to the list. The 'love it or leave it' attitude sucks. > Degrading the media to the lowest and stupidest common denominator already > happened in many places - Usenet, Well and practically any moderated > web forum. There are enough fora where convenience and lazyness take > precedence over freedom and lack of censorship. Yeah, and some of the best conversationalists bailed on usenet and the WELL as their quality diminished - ergo their quality diminshed *even more*. To me 'convenience and laziness' are more in letting a list degenerate because of spam. > The purpose of current spam subscription attacks is exactly this - eliminating > untraceability - and whether you are willing or unwilling participant in > that effort makes no difference. Eliminating untraceability? You've gotta be kidding. > The goodness of these spam attacks is that they will eliminate technically > challenged. Ha. I may be "technically challenged," but if my list was going getting screwed I would attempt to deal with it. And I'm not so socially challenged that I debate anonymously, as you do. > Go away. > > You don't want to ? See, that is the advantage of cpunks. No one can make you > go away. But I sure can filter you out. Please do.
