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

Re: General Resolution draft against spam.



Santiago,

On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 06:59:26PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Draft. Comments welcome. Please Cc the list, not me.

> - The public web archives of the different debian mailing lists, past,
> present and future, will be processed so that it becomes impossible
> for an ordinary user not having special privileges to mail someone who
> posted something to any debian list.
> 
> The natural way of obtaining this privilege will be to subscribe to those
> lists and receive messages from subscribers, but the debian project may
> implement other alternative methods to gain this privilege.
No, I want to send mail to lists even if I am not subscribed.

> We will encourage other debian list archives to mirror us, and forbid
> debian archives which do not hide addresses.
No, I want my debian email adress copy-and-paste'able.

> - The Debian source package format will be modified so that .dsc
> and .changes files do not need to have the complete email of the
> maintainer, only his name and gpg signature.
No, I want my email adress publicly available so that people can
mail me easily.

> - The public web pages and ftp archives will be modified so that it
> becomes impossible for someone without special privileges to know the
> actual email address of the individual package maintainers. It should
> still be possible to mail someone at "package@packages.debian.org",
> but no such addresses will be present on web pages.
No, I want people to mail me about my packages without "special privileges".

> The natural way of obtaining this privilege will be to have a Debian
> system in one's machine and simply looking at the available file
> in /var/lib/dpkg or looking at the different changelogs, but but the
> debian project may implement other alternative methods to gain this
> privilege.
No, this is not user-friendly.

> - There will be no mail to news gateway having email addresses in clear.
> Any such existing gateway will be forbidden by list policy, which
> subscribers should accept if they subscribe. If this is not doable,
> everything will be unsubscribed and everybody should write "yes, I
> accept" before subscribing again.
No, I want people reading news being able to see my email adress too.

> - Being able to post is a privilege, not a right. The natural way of
> obtaining this privilege, for so called "open" lists, is by subscribing
> to them and using the same address in the From: field, or by using
> an email addresses which has been previously subscribed to a special
> white list.
No, no, no. This "your from: adress is wrong"-stuff has bitten my before
at some fucked up mailing lists.

> No other mail will reach the lists until it's approved by a moderator
This one would be nice, but moderating high-traffic lists is a burden.
I would not want to do this.

> If there are no moderators for a given list, these mails will go to
> /dev/null (so to speak).
No, no dropping of emails.


So, I said pretty much no for all of the above. Why? Because you leave
no options left.
Email filtering must be optional, not enforced. I use my own filtering
rules and I am happy.


Cheers,
-- Bastian

Attachment: pgp6B9DkGQdhg.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: