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

Re: [Fwd: Problems contacting the debian people .... (was: new configuration to avoid spam at the lists)]

On the original problem, I see now that
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=166028 is
a good place to refer people wanting to antispam archives.
I'm not sure why I didn't see it before. Must be blind.
I probably should add my reasoning (debian lists have other
archives and there are probably collector-bots subscribed too).

Pascal Hakim <pasc@redellipse.net> wrote:
> I try very hard to reply[1] to all (valid) emails sent to
> listmaster@lists.debian.org as well as listarchives@debian.org. It's
> becoming more and more apparent that I'm missing some of the queries
> that are addressed there. I'm guessing some of those emails are managing
> to hit both mine and Cord's spam filters, or arriving when both of us
> are busy for a couple of days.

Do you review all listmaster@ mail (that is, a spam filter doesn't
delete it, just tags it)?

I encourage people who use spam filters on official task addresses
to set up some sort of record of what got trapped. I see you already
have a http://people.debian.org/~pasc/dda-feb.mbox for one time.

> Most requests are still taken care of however; you'll only hear about
> those that are not taken care of.

Indeed. That is the nature of these things.

> Would a Debian Enquiry Response Team help? I'm not sure... Judging by
> the burnout we get in those sort of positions, I'm not sure that it
> would be that useful once the people silly enough to help have burnt out
> themselves.

It looks rather like delegates are silently failing to
answer email anyway. Maybe the DPL team will consider doing
some "mystery shopper" tests of any delegates they've not
heard from yet?

> [1]: I have to admit that I don't reply to people asking for messages to
> be removed and/or altered on the listarchives. While the current stated
> list archives policy is "we don't do that, ever", I don't quite agree
> with that. There's no real concensus on changing that policy, and I'm
> not willing to cause a "Problems with Mr Hakim" thread on debian-devel
> just quite yet.

I guess the proper thing is to point people to the policy at
http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#disclaimer and leave it
at that. If they come back with "that's a stupid policy" then
suggest that they try to develop a change and build consensus
for it.

MJ Ray (slef), K. Lynn, England, email see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/

Reply to: