| 1 |
On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 9:19 PM, kuzetsa <kuzetsa@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 03/20/2018 08:08 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> Actually, I think it is more of a technical constraint. It is |
| 6 |
>> basically impossible to blacklist somebody on a mailing list, since |
| 7 |
>> all they need to do is roll up a new email address. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> I can think of various arguments for whitelisting or not whitelisting, |
| 10 |
>> but it seems silly to blacklist. |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> require active stewardship (moderation, blacklisting, etc.) |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> entry barriers to participation (default deny / require whitelist) |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> if there are limitations on free speech, someone has to bear the burden. |
| 18 |
> for gentoo to have list moderation (blacklist approach) which isn't |
| 19 |
> dysfunctional, the main barrier to resources will be the human resources |
| 20 |
> end of things, not technical constraints. The tools themselves are easy |
| 21 |
> enough to use, but people who are willing and able to use them, and with |
| 22 |
> a clear guideline for how it needs done is a comrel issue which the |
| 23 |
> foundation needs to sort out. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
List moderation isn't the same as blacklisting. With moderation |
| 27 |
you're effectively whitelisting because the first post anybody makes |
| 28 |
would be held for moderation, and depending on the approach you could |
| 29 |
moderate everything. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
If you allowed new subscribers to post without being held for |
| 32 |
moderation, then the issues I spoke of would still apply, no matter |
| 33 |
how much manpower you threw at it. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Rich |
Archives