* Ian Jackson (ian@davenant.greenend.org.uk) wrote:
> 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.
The TC isn't the only committee in Debian. debian-ctte also isn't the
only list where there's a set of people expected to pay attention to it
as part of their work. Examples include debian-admin, debian-x (and all
the other similar debian-<project/subproject> lists), debian-private
(well, not so much anymore, but used to be), debian-newmaint (at least,
my understanding is that the AMs are supposted to all be reading it, I
know I do), debian-qa, debian-release, debian-vote (right, Manoj? I'd
figure the secretary would have to track that list...), debian-www,
debian-<arch>/debian-ports, debian-debbugs, etc...
In fact, I think the only list that *no* one is expected to be reading
is debian-devel and maybe, now, debian-private. Perhaps debian-curiosa
too.
> > 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.
That sucks, should be fixed, maybe it's better now? I know we've done
lots of updates for SPAM handling and whatnot.
> 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.
As tbm (I think?) mentioned, Debian spamfiltering will be getting an
upgrade soon as well. As for your own spamfilters, I'm not really
expecting alot of people to jump up and down and bitch if they're in
place for the mailing lists you're on. Chances are a legit message
would be picked up by someone else if it didn't get through your
filtering and you'd see the reply anyway.
Do other people on the committee feel this way? What about people who
have to monitor other lists (Manoj?)? Honestly, this seems kind of
silly to me as a reason to differentiate debian-ctte from the rest of
the mailing lists Debian hosts when, really, pretty much all of them
fall into much the same category.
Stephen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature