Re: Moderated posts?
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 10:28 PM, The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On 10/07/2014 at 02:58 AM, Joel Rees wrote:
>
>> As Don pointed out, it's the threads that have been clipped, as it
>> were, not the topics: I think it's probably just as well, as those
>> threads themselves were started by either a sockpuppet or someone who
>> had lost control of himself, and the threads were counterproductive.
>>
>> So I can say, "systemd!" here,
>>
>> And this post will still not be blocked.
>
> And that's fair enough in its way. (Though it does unfairly also hit
> subthreads which were not on the same topic anymore, but I can see where
> trying to be fine-grained enough to comb out one but not the other might
> well be more trouble than it would be worth.)
>
> But it should still be accompanied by a public announcement that such
> action is being taken, with at least a vague indication of which
> thread(s) are being so filtered - and/or a system of automated replies
> (possibly rate-limited to stymie DoS efforts) to any attempt to reply to
> such a thread, explaining the situation.
>
> Doing such moderation silently, without comment or explanation, is just
> not cricket.
>
>> Joel Rees
>> On lkml, they block html.
>
> But do they do it silently, or is there an explanation of why an
> attempted post containing such will not be posted?
>
> If the latter, I think I might actually approve of such a policy...
Well, all you get is a generic RFC compliant message from your ISP
saying it was rejected, but not really specifically why.
IIRC, the FAQ is referenced in the rejection message, so you at least
have a clue to go read the FAQ, where, if you read as far as the
mailing list guidelines, you see that it says the list is pretty much
open if you don't post in html, and html messages are automatically
rejected.
--
Joel Rees
Be careful where you see conspiracy.
Look first in your own heart,
and ask yourself if you are not your own worst enemy.
Reply to: