I don't normally cross post, but this is kind of MAJOR news. For those who don't know, SPAM-L has been what I consider an anchor in the anti-spam community since long before I got interested in a clean Inbox. This is a very dark day indeed. :-(
Monday, 11 May 2009 it goes silent. --Chris Santerre > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Russell [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 2009-05-06 11:44 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: ALL: SPAM-L will be shutdown > > > Some of you have asked whether the list can continue > operating, as is, on its > current host, with new owners. We have, on at least one > previous occasion, > asked for volunteers to assist with the management of this > list. The total lack > of response was deafening, and was a factor in our decision > to shut down the > list, rather than make another futile attempt to find new > owners for the list. > > Some of you have asked whether the list archives could be > transferred to the > host site of some hypothetical successor to the list. I > cannot answer that > question. Pete, Doug, and I are the "owners" of this list in > the technical > sense, i.e., our email addresses are specified on "Owner=" > statements in the > list configuration. The list was started by L-Soft, and has > been hosted by > L-Soft, at no monetary cost to the "owners" or subscribers, > for more than a > decade. > > Questions about the future of the list and/or its archives > should be directed > to L-Soft. > > As I stated yesterday, recurring incidents of animosity > between subscribers > prompted the decision to shut down the list. This decision > was not triggered by > a single incident; we began discussing this possibility > during a rash of similar > incidents approximately two years ago. Back then, we came to > the conclusion > that positive contributions outweighed negative > contributions. Whether that > is still true is open for debate, but Pete, Doug, and I have > come to the > conclusion that we can no longer deal with the problems which > arise on this > list. Several times a month, threads degenerate into > childish bickering and > name-calling. I raised two kids; I recognize childish > behavior when I see it, > and we have seen plenty of it in recent months. Whether any > of the claims have > any basis in fact is, as far as I am concerned, irrelevant to > this discussion. > > Speaking only for myself, I suppose that we, as list owners, > need to take some > of the blame for this situation. We probably should have > squelched this > behavior when the list was still relatively new, but I seem > to recall that we > did not want to cast a pall of 'censorship' over what was > supposed to be a forum > for free and open discussion. Some of the most abusive > messages were posted by > the same individuals who posted some of the most useful > information, and we did > not want to lose those contributions. In hindsight, that was > an obvious and > fatal mistake. > > If you want to start a new forum for the discussion of > anti-spam issues, be > our guest. Feel free to post the "birth" announcement on > SPAM-L; just be sure > to do it before Monday, 11 May 2009. I would, however, > advise you to avoid our > mistakes - act swiftly and without mercy to squelch the kind > of behavior that > led us to conclude that killing this list was our only option. > > -- > Paul Russell, SPAM-L Co-Owner (for a few more days)
