Good example Nick. I'm a scuba diver, and don't want my lists cluttered up with news about the ebola virus. But ... if a new virus crops up that loves to grow in compressed air tanks, or a computer bug that affects dive computers, I think that it should be posted to the list. If you will read the messages posted to the list, instead of launching tirades about virus warnings, you will see that no one is supporting the idea of posting missing child warnings to unrelated lists. My point was that sometimes a virus warning can be relevant to a specific list, and categorical standards for rejection do not serve the purposes of the list. Bill Silvert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nick Simicich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "list-managers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 7:21 PM Subject: Re: Fw: Spam Filters vs. Mailing Lists > At 11:28 AM 5/21/2001 +0100, William Silvert wrote: > >So while I agree that YAV (Yet Another Virus) postings should be banned from > >most lists, the attitude that all subscribers should be sophisticated about > >the latest developments in virus technology is not justified in my opinion. > >I think that we owe it to our subscribers to help them know what to look > >for. ... > to allow such postings on the excuse, say, that "anything that affects > scuba divers is on topic for a scuba diving list" makes it a list without a > focus.
