| 1 |
On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 09:34 -0400, Michael Cummings wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 09:28:50 -0400 |
| 3 |
> Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> > On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 07:30 -0400, Michael Cummings wrote: |
| 6 |
> > > banning/suspending a user from a mailing list. They would retain the |
| 7 |
> > > right to receive the mail, just not comment for a short period (and |
| 8 |
> > > hopefully cooler heads will prevail, yada, etc.). |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > You mean the privilege to receive the mails, right? |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> Actually, not exactly :) Not knowing anything about the particular list |
| 13 |
> management software we're using, of course, and basing this only my |
| 14 |
> experience with other mailing lists and our own (ancient) listserv's |
| 15 |
> here at work, users can be placed in read-only status, which means they |
| 16 |
> can't post to the list, but still receive the mailings. Possibly not |
| 17 |
> feasible with out particular list implementation, but something I |
| 18 |
> thought I'd toss out there. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Well, mlmmj doesn't have this sort of feature. Instead, it has a more |
| 21 |
procmail-like access list. We can use that to put users into a |
| 22 |
read-only status, by filtering for them and denying posting from them, |
| 23 |
but that still doesn't change my opinion that participation on the |
| 24 |
mailing lists, including *receiving* mails, is a privilege, not a right. |
| 25 |
Currently, it is a privilege that we extend to anyone, and we have not |
| 26 |
revoked it except in dire circumstances. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 30 |
Release Engineering Strategic Lead |
| 31 |
Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams |
| 32 |
Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee |
| 33 |
Gentoo Foundation |
Archives