On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 18:25:10 PM +0900, Jean-Christophe Helary
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On 3 janv. 08, at 17:16, M. Fioretti wrote:
>
>> All this is another story, however, really. I have no intention to
>> ask again that unsubscribed users are not allowed to post, as I
>> have to admit OOo lists are a bit unique from this point of view.
>
> Well, no. They are not. A huge number of free software projects have
> adopted such policies. For one, you can check the Debian project
> lists.
First of all, Debian lists are barely an example of community I'd care
to consider or recommend. I left Debian-users in disgust last january
because of the way a few (subscribed!) kids were allowed to make a
mess of the whole place. In addition to this, there is the fact that
Debian (and its lists) is supposed to make novices suffer. Just follow
some conversations and it's evident. This one is a completely
different community, situation and model. It doesn't make sense to
regulate things here according to how they're managed in Debian.
Then there is the fact that I did mention this is not the main issue:
I explicitly said the main mess is made from the SUBSCRIBED users
which answer to subject-less messages (something which on Debian, by
the way, would probably trigger some flame war from what I've seen).
So let's stick to the main point: stop tolerating subject-less
messages (even if they come from subscribed users, for that matter).
> Actually, I consider it a service to the community to add flags such as:
>
> [users] [moderated]
> [users] [moderated] YOU MUST GIVE A SUMMARY HERE
>
> because they can allow users to opt for automatic deletion of mails
> containing them.
>From this statement, I honestly have problems to understand if you're
simply kidding because you're bored or if you really didn't understand
what I'm talking about.
First of all, what I'm complaining about is not the "[users]
[moderated]" part. Is the fact that there is nothing meaningful after
that. Secondly, I'm the first who said that automatic deletion of
such messages is the way to go until moderators stop letting them
through.
> I agree on your characterization of the lists but not on the status
> of volunteers. Volunteers do what they want/can and they are free to
> answer, or not, any mail coming to the list.
as long as they don't make the list and its archives useless for
others. Which is, again, just what happens when they answer
subjectless messages without adding proper subjects, and just what I
complained about.
Marco
--
Your own civil rights and the quality of your life heavily depend on how
software is used *around* you: http://digifreedom.net/node/84
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
