| 1 |
Mark Bainter <mark-gt@×××××.org> writes: |
| 2 |
> Alan [alan@×××××.org] wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Or filter the list through spamassassin before it goes out to mailman (or |
| 4 |
>> something like that). |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Close the list Filter the lists |
| 7 |
> False Positives No Yes |
| 8 |
> 100% effective Yes No |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Hrm...choice seems clear to me. Filtering spam on a |
| 11 |
> mailing list is a bad idea. It's one thing for an |
| 12 |
> individual user to decide an acceptable level of risk |
| 13 |
> for false positives, it's quite another to choose that |
| 14 |
> for an entire list. Just my two cents. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
How about making a new list, gentoo-dev-spam, and sending the filtered |
| 17 |
mail to that address? Those who want to avoid false positives can |
| 18 |
freely subscribe to that list. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
This might seem ridiculous but it's not as ridiculous as doing nothing |
| 21 |
and letting the mailing list get cluttered by spam. How much spam is |
| 22 |
enough to make the list closed? 10 messages per day? 100 per day? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Better even, put the address "gentoo-dev-spam@g.o" in the front |
| 25 |
page of www.gentoo.org. That would further raise the signal/noise |
| 26 |
ratio of gentoo-dev, which is now, IMHO, rather much plagued by |
| 27 |
messages which would rather belong to gentoo-newbie or |
| 28 |
gentoo-user. (Or forums.gentoo.org) |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
To be a bit more realistic, a bit more realistic solution is to close |
| 31 |
the lists. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Distributing spam on the mailing lists is increasingly hurting the |
| 34 |
gentoo community by hindering communication. To not close the mailing |
| 35 |
lists would be a sign of weakness and inability to make |
| 36 |
decisions. Personal mail filters should not - and could not - be the |
| 37 |
solution, because not everybody has the possibility, resources or |
| 38 |
willingness to install SpamAssassin or similar. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Antti, fed up with spam |
Archives