Here is a suggestion.
Require people to subscribe to a list to post to the list.
This is in addition to requiring subscription to receive posts
mailed to the list. Nanog adopts this approach and has been
fairly successful in avoiding spam, I believe.
Subscription to Post can be made contingent on the subscriber not
agreeing to post material that is out of scope for the list and
willing to abide by the list administrator's decision to moderate
inappropriate postings.
Free-for-all type of lists are inherently prone to spam. Thanks.
cheers,
suresh
--- Keith Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > however, I have seen a couple of occasions where I believe that
> > > a 'moderator' acted inappropriately in filtering messages that
> > > came from non-subscribers but were arguably on-topic for the lists.
> >
> > So the non-subscriber subscribed, and their posts went through okay,
> > right?
>
> no. the WG was badly in need of a clue from folks outside of the WG -
> because the WG was failing to understand how its work would interact
> with and/or affect other applications or protocols outside of its purview.
>
> the would-be contributor did not want to subscribe to the list because
> he/she had no desire to participate in the day-to-day conversations of
> the working group. after all, the contributor normally worked at
> layer X while the WG was working at layer Y.
>
> still, the WG needed the contribution. it would have benefited from
> knowing that what it was doing was inherently flawed, and that its
> poorly-informed design decisions would do harm and/or cause its work
> to be less useful than anticipated.
>
> but the capriciousness of the mailing list maintainer prevented this
> from happening, and many months of hard work were wasted.
>
> > (If not, and the moderator was in fact filtering all posts
> > to the mailing list in question, then this example is a red-herring.)
>
> seems like you've left a big hole in your case analysis.
>
>
> > Gas tanks explode - we ban cars?
>
> if the gas tanks explode under normal or even occasional use, we do in
> fact recall the car.
>
> you seem to believe that non-subscribers are inherently illegimiate,
> and that any barriers we erect to make it more difficult for them to
> post are therefore justified. looks like circular reasoning to me.
>
> Keith
>
=====
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
