* Raul Miller (moth@debian.org) wrote: > On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 08:56:31PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > > There are other heuristics in place to fight SPAM on the Debian lists > > already. I'm on quite a few of them and I see an occational SPAM, but > > not much, really. I've also got my own spam-filtering in place, of > > course, which I imagine also helps. > > Your fundamental point seems to be that we should have no filtering > till after the list has distributed it (or, at least, no more than what > the other lists have). That any additional filtering should be on a > per-user basis. Generally I think the spam filtering done for all the other lists is pretty decent and takes case of most of it. I've got my own filtering in case something gets through (and for non-debian lists that don't have much filtering at all). > Is this a fair summary? It's pretty close I guess. > Do you also feel occasional spam is ok for the web archive? Yeah, that doesn't bother me too much. > Ian: perhaps we should split this list into two -- one for official > announcements (this one can be moderated, or only accept certain pgp > signatures or whatever) and one which is open for discussion. Would you > have any objections to that approach? I think that'd be alright, a seperate lists for decision announcements is fine that requires DD/gpg-signed messages. Ian's concern seemed to be more that the committee is required to read all messages to the list, which I think would still be the case for the 'discussion' list, so I don't see how this addresses that concern. Stephen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature