On Oct 26, 2015, at 12:35 PM, Jim Popovitch <jim...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 10:39 PM, Scott Weeks <sur...@mauigateway.com> wrote:
>> It looks like someone's trying to make a point. > > The takeaway is: > > 1) NANOG doesn't seem to do simple inbound spam filtering :-) In fairness to the Communications Committee (of which I have zero influence or power), a few points: 1) They apparently filtered it more than a day ago, we are just seeing the queue drain. Which is not surprising on a mailing list of > 10K email addresses. 2) Inbound spam filtering is VERY HARD on something like NANOG. How many people here post things like samples of spam? Imagine the backlash: “This is an operational list. How could you not expect operational content to include samples?!?!?! AAARRGGGGGHHHHHHHh HRHFLSHFBEAW% ^&*DKJHFSLkdjh@#%asltrifhuawlekhtfweq5r1r#@%!@#QWEGDAwsgfhqw!!!!111!!!!” (That is honestly what I expect of some posters here….) 3) Anyone who feels this is so frickin’ bad it is unbearable, and knows they could do SO MUCH BETTER themselves, should volunteer for the Communications Committee. Otherwise, everyone should thank the unpaid volunteers for their gracious and excellent work day after day, year after year. Or just STFU. For my part, I would just like to thank the CC members. I think they do a most amazing job, and deserve of humblest gratitude. -- TTFN, patrick
