Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 15:02:32 -0400 From: "Peter C. Lai" <sirmoo@cowbert.2y.net> To: Lupe Christoph <lupe@lupe-christoph.de> Cc: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za>, Jens Rehsack <rehsack@liwing.de>, freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Administrivia: Discussion - Making this list subscriber-only Message-ID: <20020828190232.GA533@cowbert.2y.net> In-Reply-To: <20020828113310.GP26115@lupe-christoph.de> References: <3D6BD999.10753D8E@liwing.de> <200208272004.g7RK4gl5023435@grimreaper.grondar.org> <20020828113310.GP26115@lupe-christoph.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 01:33:10PM +0200, Lupe Christoph wrote: > I run a couple of Debian machines, and debian-security is *very* similar > to freebsd-security, sans the excitement about Spam and off-topic posts. > About the same Signal/Noise, about the same volume. (Not right now, but > most of the time ;-) > A better comparison would be freebsd-stable. Every and any problem that people have they will send there as long as uname -r says xxx-STABLE. This includes things like 'i can't do foo anymore after upgrading' to debugging of a kernel. The SNR of that list is much lower than here. Some questions typically get drowned out by other ones that people on this list would deem off-topic. I don't see discussions there about appropriate content either. If you are lamenting about SNR, propose to make this list technical and not general. Furthermore, you can also set an example by not group-replying to mail you think is off-topic. It all comes down to the mentality of the subscribers. If people here habitually digress, then that is the nature of this list. > > 1) This list could use a charter. There are too many meta-discussions > about what is appropriate content. Anybody know where to steal one? > 2a) If the charter says that only security incidents, loopholes, etc are > to be discussed, there should be a security-questions. > 2b) If not, then not ;-) > There is a "charter" but all it says is: "FREEBSD-SECURITY Security issues FreeBSD computer security issues (DES, Kerberos, known security holes and fixes, etc). This is a technical mailing list for which strictly technical content is expected." Well, at least it says that chatter is discouraged (such as complaining about spam) but it doesn't limit what 'technical' questions are being asked. "I can't implement foo in IPSEC. Has someone done 'foo' with IPSEC before, and how?" seems to be a legitimate technical question to me. > > > > OK - you have a deal! If you annoy us properly by submitting enough > > > > good-quality documenation upgrades, I'll punish you by a) ensuring they > > > > are committed, and b) if enough of them come, ensuring that you can commit > > > > them your damn self ;-) Yes, telling people to RTFM where there is no FM to read is silly (or if you need to be Jordan Hubbard to understand it). -- Peter C. Lai University of Connecticut Dept. of Molecular and Cell Biology | Undergraduate Research Assistant Yale University School of Medicine Center for Medical Informatics | Research Assistant http://cowbert.2y.net/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020828190232.GA533>