Keith Moore wrote: >>Lists for open discussion should require such hoops for participation, >>esp. when there are plenty of reasonable, sufficiently correlated >>identifiers than "not a list member" to identify spam. >> > > assuming you meant "should not require" I'm very much in agreement.
Oops - typed too fast for Netscape. Yes, should NOT require. > especially when it's trivial to fix things so that the process used > by a moderator to approve a message also adds the sender of that > message to the "allowed posters" list. I don't want to approve senders. I want to approve posts. Some senders send approved posts as well as non-approved posts. Some formats are not approved (BCC, CC'd in long lists, etc.) I don't want to filter on sender; I want to filter on spam content, so I filter on spam content. Using non-spam info (sender) to infer spam content is needlessly indirect. Joe
