[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: *** bluber *** Re: Male xxxxxx enhancement formula^

On 5/24/05, Ian Greenhoe <ihgreenman@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-05-24 at 23:15 +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> > Am 2005-05-24 13:28:04, schrieb Ian Greenhoe:
> > > 3) Reject non-subscribed senders.
> > Not acceptable.
> The question here is what's less acceptable?  A bunch-o-spam or not
> having non-list subscribers be able to ask questions.  I think that the
> level of spam is annoying, but less annoying than having to have people
> subscribe to the list.  So, I agree with you, but I do not feel as
> vehemently as you apparently do.

Requiring people to subscribe in order to post is worse than annoying.
 If a mailing list requires subscription to post, and I'm not
generally interested in the list traffic, I won't post, because the
list traffic is unacceptable.  In the case of one software package I
use, that's the only way of providing any feedback to the authors. 
Consequently, though I have suggestions for improving the software, I
don't send them in.  Similarly, to file a bug report for gcc, you have
to sign up for a bugzilla account.  I'm not going to deal with another
account (and another password), just to gripe about silliness in g++.

Your main avenue for communication with your user base *must* be open,
or there's little point in making your software open.  It can be a
mailing list, a newsgroup, a comment address, or a web form, but if
users have to join a "club" to contact you, you've done something

Michael A. Marsh

Reply to: