Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 14:36:06 +0100 From: Mike Dewhirst <Dewhirst.M@UCLES.org.uk> To: "'questions@freebsd.org'" <questions@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: hub.freebsd.org spam policy Message-ID: <0B0368CED76DD4118E1200D0B73E9B5D041E9FAA@MAIL1>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C1DCA6.D6799A60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" just picking up on an earlier thing about HTML email (and begin guilty myself) - is it not possible to strip all HTML messages down to plain text format? I think the jakarta-struts mailing list does it... > -----Original Message----- > From: Ceri [mailto:setantae@submonkey.net] > Sent: 05 April 2002 13:56 > To: Philip J. Koenig > Cc: Questions@FreeBSD.ORG > Subject: Re: hub.freebsd.org spam policy > > > On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 03:52:46AM -0800, Philip J. Koenig wrote: > > On 5 Apr 2002, at 11:54, Ceri boldly uttered: > > > On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 02:27:02AM -0800, Philip J. Koenig wrote: > > > > > Also, I have posted to this list in the past from at > least 4 different > > > addresses, and I don't see why I should have to subscribe > with each one. > > > > You mean like almost every other email list on earth? C'mon now, I > > think we're grasping at straws here. > > Not really. You see, I don't actually care about this issue. > I just posted to this thread to make a few facts clear, and > then my last > post was just filled with my humble opinions. > > I'm not trying to defend FreeBSD list policy, so I've no need to grasp > at straws. I'm just saying. > > > > You also should bear in mind that developers have > @FreeBSD.org addresses, > > > so the policies currently in place work for them too, > whereas using a > > > subscription option as you suggest wouldn't. > > > > Well I'm not sure what that proves. I do however know that > I had to > > email the freebsd postmaster at his own personal domain in > order for > > him to receive any email from me until we found out what rule was > > blocking me. I'm sure it's not the first time such an independent > > mail account became necessary. > > Oh, it doesn't prove anything, and I didn't mean to imply it did. > I was just saying that changing the lists to subscriber-only > posting and > lifting the "you must have reverse DNS in place" restriction > wouldn't be > a perfect solution. > > > I also know that there are a plethora of local user > measures that can > > be used to address the spam problem, and I really don't think one > > should assume that there can be no distinction between how list > > traffic is dealt with and how personal addresses are dealt with. > > True. I don't think freefall would cope too well with 400+ copies of > procmail firing up every second though. > > > > And I know other lists that have the same policies > (nom-steer, for one). > > > > Oh I'm sure there are a few. But if I had to make a wild > assumption, > > I suspect the percentage setup that way are a small > fraction of 1% of > > all public lists. > > Well, throwing wild assumptions to the lions for the time > being in favour > of facts: of all the unmoderated lists I'm subscribed to, > 100% of them are > set up this way (I don't admin any lists). > Perhaps I'm unrepresentative, I'm not sure, but each of us > can only speak > from their experience, not being privy to the administrative > policy of every > list on the net. > > Ceri > > -- > keep a mild groove on > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > =********************************************************** If you are not the intended recipient, employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination or copying of this communication and its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication and its attachments in error, please return the original message and attachments to the sender using the reply facility on e-mail. Internet communications are not secure and therefore the UCLES Group does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the UCLES Group unless otherwise specifically stated. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses although this does not guarantee that this email is virus free. **********************************************************= ------_=_NextPart_001_01C1DCA6.D6799A60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-= 1"> <META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2653.12"> <TITLE>RE: hub.freebsd.org spam policy</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>just picking up on an earlier thing about HTML email (and= begin guilty myself) - is it not possible to strip all HTML messages down = to plain text format?</FONT></P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>I think the jakarta-struts mailing list does it...</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> -----Original Message-----</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> From: Ceri [<A HREF=3D"mailto:setantae@submonkey.ne= t">mailto:setantae@submonkey.net</A>]</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Sent: 05 April 2002 13:56</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> To: Philip J. Koenig</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Cc: Questions@FreeBSD.ORG</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Subject: Re: hub.freebsd.org spam policy</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 03:52:46AM -0800, Philip J.= Koenig wrote:</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > On 5 Apr 2002, at 11:54, Ceri boldly uttered: = </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > > On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 02:27:02AM -0800,= Philip J. Koenig wrote:</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > > Also, I have posted to this list in the p= ast from at </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> least 4 different</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > > addresses, and I don't see why I should h= ave to subscribe </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> with each one.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > You mean like almost every other email list on= earth? C'mon now, I </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > think we're grasping at straws here. </F= ONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Not really. You see, I don't actually care ab= out this issue.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> I just posted to this thread to make a few facts cl= ear, and </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> then my last</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> post was just filled with my humble opinions.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> I'm not trying to defend FreeBSD list policy, so I'= ve no need to grasp</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> at straws. I'm just saying.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > > You also should bear in mind that develop= ers have </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> @FreeBSD.org addresses,</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > > so the policies currently in place work f= or them too, </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> whereas using a</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > > subscription option as you suggest wouldn= 't.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > Well I'm not sure what that proves. I do= however know that </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> I had to </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > email the freebsd postmaster at his own person= al domain in </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> order for </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > him to receive any email from me until we foun= d out what rule was </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > blocking me. I'm sure it's not the first= time such an independent </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > mail account became necessary.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Oh, it doesn't prove anything, and I didn't mean to= imply it did.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> I was just saying that changing the lists to subscr= iber-only </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> posting and</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> lifting the "you must have reverse DNS in plac= e" restriction </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> wouldn't be</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> a perfect solution.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > I also know that there are a plethora of local= user </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> measures that can </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > be used to address the spam problem, and I rea= lly don't think one </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > should assume that there can be no distinction= between how list </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > traffic is dealt with and how personal address= es are dealt with.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> True. I don't think freefall would cope too w= ell with 400+ copies of</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> procmail firing up every second though.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > > And I know other lists that have the same= policies </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> (nom-steer, for one).</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > Oh I'm sure there are a few. But if I ha= d to make a wild </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> assumption, </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > I suspect the percentage setup that way are a = small </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> fraction of 1% of </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > all public lists.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Well, throwing wild assumptions to the lions for th= e time </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> being in favour</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> of facts: of all the unmoderated lists I'm subscrib= ed to, </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> 100% of them are</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> set up this way (I don't admin any lists).</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Perhaps I'm unrepresentative, I'm not sure, but eac= h of us </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> can only speak</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> from their experience, not being privy to the admin= istrative </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> policy of every</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> list on the net.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Ceri</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> -- </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> keep a mild groove on</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org<= /FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in t= he body of the message</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> </P> <CODE><FONT SIZE=3D3><BR> <BR> =3D**********************************************************<BR> <BR> If you are not the intended recipient, employee or agent responsible for de= livering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified tha= t any dissemination or copying of this communication and its attachments is= strictly prohibited.<BR> <BR> If you have received this communication and its attachments in error, pleas= e return the original message and attachments to the sender using the reply= facility on e-mail.<BR> <BR> Internet communications are not secure and therefore the UCLES Group does n= ot accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message. Any views= or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessaril= y represent those of the UCLES Group unless otherwise specifically stated.<= BR> <BR> This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by<BR> MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses although this does not gua= rantee that this email is virus free.<BR> <BR> **********************************************************=3D<BR> </FONT></CODE> </BODY> </HTML> ------_=_NextPart_001_01C1DCA6.D6799A60-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0B0368CED76DD4118E1200D0B73E9B5D041E9FAA>