Re: [SLUG] Welcome to the Movieglobe Mailing List
Hi! On Sat, 22 Mar 2003 03:33:21 -0800 (PST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You have been added to the list. Wow, neat trick. I've unsubbed the list, and added a couple of mailman filters. That's another list manager we're silently ignoring mail from. The amusing and entertaining character(s) who were connecting from 203.134.131.199 and 203.51.76.146 at around 10:23 and and 10:33 last night should consider the existance of, for example, X-IPAddy: headers in subscription emails before they try again. -- Pete -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
RE: [SLUG] Welcome to the Movieglobe Mailing List
=Wow, neat trick. = =I've unsubbed the list, and added a couple of mailman =filters. That's another list manager we're silently ignoring =mail from. Which is a prime example of why the list should be changed to subscribers only can post - it would LESSEN the workload on our overworked list admins...:-) Jon -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Welcome to the Movieglobe Mailing List
quote who=Jon Biddell Which is a prime example of why the list should be changed to subscribers only can post - it would LESSEN the workload on our overworked list admins...:-) I disagree - not only is this a bad example of the point, but changing the list to subscribers-only would not lessen the administrative workload. It's a bad example because it's exactly the sort of activity that would get around the subscriber-only restriction. If a spammer subscribes, then there's nothing stopping them from posting. It will not necessarily lessen the admin workload because not only will we have bad mail to moderate (currently stuff caught by the internal Mailman spam filter, the SpamAssassin plugin, the many regexp filters that we have built up over time, size and recipient restrictions, our MTA restrictions, etc), but we will have good mail to moderate (people posting with alternate addresses, genuine non-subscriber posts, etc). So, I doubt that would double the workload, but it would certainly increase it. There are also many positive reasons to keep the list open to non-subscriber open posting, which have been hashed over time and time again. We get *very* little spam compared to other lists, and every time this comes up, the general consensus concludes that it's far more effective to squeeze out the little spam we do get through ever-improving methods, than it would be to crank up the work involved (and reduce the 'nice-ness' of how the list works) in perpetuity. There's no 'hard' list policy, and there's definitely scope for change in the future, but right now we're doing really well... I can't see much reason to change. Thanks, - Jeff -- I'm just mucking round down the shallow end of the literary pool, I suppose. - Mick Molloy -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
RE: [SLUG] Welcome to the Movieglobe Mailing List
quote who=Jon Biddell Which is a prime example of why the list should be changed to subscribers only can post - it would LESSEN the workload on our overworked list admins...:-) I disagree - not only is this a bad example of the point, but changing the list to subscribers-only would not lessen the administrative workload. It's a bad example because it's exactly the sort of activity that would get around the subscriber-only restriction. If a spammer subscribes, then there's nothing stopping them from posting. I can see your point in one respect - but if they do subscribe, admins CAN kick them off and we don't get the mail. Yes I know this adds more work for the admins - you're right about that. Yeah its not all that much - but none is better than a little I guess. So I guess I disagree and agree! :) That's my 2c... Its not worth that much tho! AW. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
