Re: (forw) [debian-ctte-request@lists.debian.org: Re: Posting on the list [pasc@murphy.debian.org: Re: md5sum <FILE produces spurious ` -' in output]]
Stephen Frost writes ("(forw) [debian-ctte-request@lists.debian.org: Re: Posting on the list [pasc@murphy.debian.org: Re: md5sum <FILE produces spurious ` -' in output]]"):
> * Ian Jackson (ian@davenant.greenend.org.uk) wrote:
> > If the alternatives are a moderated list or one that has completely
> > open posting then we will have to go back to a moderated list.
>
> This doesn't actually make a damn bit of sense. Are you actually
> concerned about some kind of sudden increase in traffic if this list is
> made open, like *every* *other* Debian list?
As I say, this isn't just a mailing list. The TC members are expected
to pay attention and read the mails in a reasonably timely way.
> SPAM blocking will still be done, list registration is already
> open, I really doubt it'd make much difference except to alliviate
> this stupid problem with debian-ctte@d.o by allowing it to be just
> plain forwarded to this list without having to worry about things
> bouncing because people aren't subscribed.
As I say, it _used to_ be open to all. The spam volume was very high
indeed - much more mail than the legitimate traffic.
If the TC members are expected to read the messages and pay attention
to them, rather than skimming them occasionally like the sewer that
many of the other Debian lists have become, then we can expect not to
have to deal with the spam.
Speaking personally, debian's spamfiltering arrangements are nowhere
near as good as my own, which is why I there are no addresses
@debian.org that go straight to my mailbox, except ones with at least
some minimal kind of access control on who can post.
Ian.
Reply to: