From: Dan <aya...@in...> - 2003-05-22 15:20:22
|
I assume it will not be news to anyone when I point out that there is a growing SPAM problem here. Surely something can be done. I know this is true because none of my other mailing-list mailboxes fill up like this. Now I know that I'm not paying for anything so I can't very well too loudly. It's just that there's a lot of SPAM. |
From: <le...@nt...> - 2003-05-22 15:51:48
|
On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 12:40:18AM +1000, Dan wrote: > I assume it will not be news to anyone when I point out that there is a > growing SPAM problem here. Yeah, I use http://bogofilter.sf.net > Surely something can be done. I know this is true because none of my > other mailing-list mailboxes fill up like this. You'll get spam (to your address) if you post as well, so you'll probably need something outside of the mailing list irrespective of whether the list is filtered anyway. -- Michael. |
From: Philip B. <ph...@bo...> - 2003-05-22 20:52:30
|
On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 04:51:45PM +0100, le...@nt... wrote: > ..... > You'll get spam (to your address) if you post as well, so you'll probably need > something outside of the mailing list irrespective of whether the list is > filtered anyway. I [not the original poster], and presumably many others, drop dri mail into a separate folder. So if the list is de-spammed, there will at least be no spam in THAT folder. |
From: <le...@nt...> - 2003-05-23 00:24:23
|
On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 01:52:29PM -0700, Philip Brown wrote: >So if the list is de-spammed, there will at least be no > spam in THAT folder. Yes, the tautology is clear enough, thanks. -- Michael. |
From: Russ D. <Rus...@as...> - 2003-05-22 16:10:47
|
On Thu, 2003-05-22 at 07:40, Dan wrote: > I assume it will not be news to anyone when I point out that there is a > growing SPAM problem here. > Surely something can be done. I know this is true because none of my > other mailing-list mailboxes fill up like this. > Now I know that I'm not paying for anything so I can't very well too > loudly. It's just that there's a lot of SPAM. I would say run spamassasian, so you don't get the spam, but passing through dri-devel seems to legitimize spam in the eyes of spamassasian, so it doesn't help much. But from what I understand, its an issue with sf.net, and the only way of stopping the spam (besides fixing sf.net) is to disallow posts from non-members (which is probably why you don't get spam on your other lists). -- Russ Dill <Rus...@as...> |
From: Arpi <ar...@th...> - 2003-05-23 06:51:28
|
Hi, > I would say run spamassasian, so you don't get the spam, but passing > through dri-devel seems to legitimize spam in the eyes of spamassasian, > so it doesn't help much. I'm running spamassassin on my emails and it catched all dri-devel spams nowdays (the bayesian filter in SA 2.53 helps a lot). > But from what I understand, its an issue with sf.net, and the only way > of stopping the spam (besides fixing sf.net) is to disallow posts from > non-members (which is probably why you don't get spam on your other > lists). Agree. I've set mplayer-dev-eng list to members-only posting and it receives zero spams. The other mplayer lists with no such limitation would get a lot, but SA catches them on the server (mplayerhq.hu). Since dri-devel is hosted on sf.net, no way to route incoming (to the listserver) mails through SA, so the only way to stop spam is changing the list members-only (or move list to other server with more control). Note, that members-only doesn't mean that you have to receive the mails, you can set nomail flag and read the list via news gateway or web archive. I don't understand why isn't the dri-devel list changed to member-only yet. (while I personally don't care, since SA filters the spams out at my side) A'rpi / Astral & ESP-team -- Developer of MPlayer G2, the Movie Framework for all - http://www.MPlayerHQ.hu |
From: Dimitry N. N. <di...@ti...> - 2003-05-23 04:36:06
|
=F7 =D3=CF=CF=C2=DD=C5=CE=C9=C9 =CF=D4 22 =ED=C1=CA 2003 21:51 Russ Dill = =CE=C1=D0=C9=D3=C1=CC: > On Thu, 2003-05-22 at 07:40, Dan wrote: > > I assume it will not be news to anyone when I point out that there is= a > > growing SPAM problem here. > > Surely something can be done. I know this is true because none of my > > other mailing-list mailboxes fill up like this. > > Now I know that I'm not paying for anything so I can't very well too > > loudly. It's just that there's a lot of SPAM. > > I would say run spamassasian, so you don't get the spam, but passing > through dri-devel seems to legitimize spam in the eyes of spamassasian, > so it doesn't help much. > > But from what I understand, its an issue with sf.net, and the only way > of stopping the spam (besides fixing sf.net) is to disallow posts from > non-members (which is probably why you don't get spam on your other > lists). Is this a good idia filter out all messages with html??? |
From: Russ D. <Rus...@as...> - 2003-05-23 05:10:42
|
> > I would say run spamassasian, so you don't get the spam, but passing > > through dri-devel seems to legitimize spam in the eyes of spamassasian, > > so it doesn't help much. > > > > But from what I understand, its an issue with sf.net, and the only way > > of stopping the spam (besides fixing sf.net) is to disallow posts from > > non-members (which is probably why you don't get spam on your other > > lists). > Is this a good idia filter out all messages with html??? > only if you think people who send html email have nothing usefull to say. I'll ask a related question, is it good to filter out messages with foriegn charsets, like, say, koi8-r? caus if I sent all html email and all email with foriegn charsets to /dev/null, I'd get a lot less spam... -- Russ Dill <Rus...@as...> |
From: Mike A. H. <mh...@ww...> - 2003-05-23 20:12:06
|
On 22 May 2003, Russ Dill wrote: >> > I would say run spamassasian, so you don't get the spam, but passing >> > through dri-devel seems to legitimize spam in the eyes of spamassasian, >> > so it doesn't help much. >> > >> > But from what I understand, its an issue with sf.net, and the only way >> > of stopping the spam (besides fixing sf.net) is to disallow posts from >> > non-members (which is probably why you don't get spam on your other >> > lists). >> Is this a good idia filter out all messages with html??? >> > >only if you think people who send html email have nothing usefull to >say. I'll ask a related question, is it good to filter out messages with >foriegn charsets, like, say, koi8-r? No, it is actually a bad idea. A very bad idea. A while back, I blocked Japanese encodings because a large portion of spam I received was in Japanese encoding (sp?). However after looking at the spam collected, a lot of it was legit postings from people to various lists. The reason why this is bad, is because all 8 bit encodings contain ASCII as the first 128 characters, so no matter what encoding a particular person uses for their own languages, they can still communicate in English with the same encoding. As such, the majority of people do just that, and if you scan random English email, you'll find that a large portion of it is in non-ISO8859 encoding. Since ASCII is the common denominator, it displays fine. -- Mike A. Harris |
From: Russ D. <Rus...@as...> - 2003-05-28 04:38:33
|
> >> Is this a good idia filter out all messages with html??? > >> > > > >only if you think people who send html email have nothing usefull to > >say. I'll ask a related question, is it good to filter out messages with > >foriegn charsets, like, say, koi8-r? > > No, it is actually a bad idea. A very bad idea. A while back, I > blocked Japanese encodings because a large portion of spam I > received was in Japanese encoding (sp?). <snip> I was being sarcastic, his message was encoded with koi8-r, which, along with being html, is one of the indescriminate reasons people block email (and get a good number of false positives) -- Russ Dill <Rus...@as...> |
From: Dimitry N. N. <di...@ti...> - 2003-05-28 06:42:12
|
=F7 =D3=CF=CF=C2=DD=C5=CE=C9=C9 =CF=D4 28 =ED=C1=CA 2003 10:38 Russ Dill = =CE=C1=D0=C9=D3=C1=CC: > > >> Is this a good idia filter out all messages with html??? > > > > > >only if you think people who send html email have nothing usefull to > > >say. I'll ask a related question, is it good to filter out messages = with > > >foriegn charsets, like, say, koi8-r? > > > > No, it is actually a bad idea. A very bad idea. A while back, I > > blocked Japanese encodings because a large portion of spam I > > received was in Japanese encoding (sp?). > > <snip> > > I was being sarcastic, his message was encoded with koi8-r, which, alon= g > with being html, is one of the indescriminate reasons people block emai= l > (and get a good number of false positives) I see :-( May be I have said not what I mean :-( I am not very well with english. .= . There was question How many messages in html wich is not spam??? I can not read the messages, any way. . . unfortunatly I do not remember where I have read the suggestion do not po= st=20 html in mail lists... Yes it is always posible to setup the mail list polisy accept only mail i= n=20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dascii (yes this polisy also forbid charset=3Diso-8859-1) but in the case there = mast be=20 some explanation how to setup users' mail client to send mail in the list= in=20 appropriate form. . . |
From: Philip B. <ph...@bo...> - 2003-05-28 07:38:24
|
On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 09:38:31PM -0700, Russ Dill wrote: > I was being sarcastic, his message was encoded with koi8-r, which, along > with being html, is one of the indescriminate reasons people block email > (and get a good number of false positives) however, foreign language encoding is separate from html email. blocking based on foreign language encodings is not such a good idea. blocking html is not so bad, though. |
From: Sven L. <sve...@wa...> - 2003-05-28 08:11:29
|
On Wed, May 28, 2003 at 12:38:24AM -0700, Philip Brown wrote: > On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 09:38:31PM -0700, Russ Dill wrote: > > I was being sarcastic, his message was encoded with koi8-r, which, along > > with being html, is one of the indescriminate reasons people block email > > (and get a good number of false positives) > > however, foreign language encoding is separate from html email. > > blocking based on foreign language encodings is not such a good idea. > blocking html is not so bad, though. You need to block multi-part mails with only one html part too though, which is not so easy to do, i think. Friendly, Sven Luther |
From: Mike A. H. <mh...@ww...> - 2003-05-29 03:54:40
|
On Wed, 28 May 2003, Sven Luther wrote: >> > I was being sarcastic, his message was encoded with koi8-r, which, along >> > with being html, is one of the indescriminate reasons people block email >> > (and get a good number of false positives) >> >> however, foreign language encoding is separate from html email. >> >> blocking based on foreign language encodings is not such a good idea. >> blocking html is not so bad, though. > >You need to block multi-part mails with only one html part too though, >which is not so easy to do, i think. This filter doesn't catch *everything*, but for the last 6 years or so, it has had zero false positives for me while subscribed to limitless numbers of mailing lists. :0: * ^Content-Type:.*text/html HTML I go through the HTML folder occasionally, and all of the stuff is junk spam. There may be the opportunity for false positives, but in practice over the years, I've yet to see any with my mail load. Different people's mail usage may vary however... Hope this helps. -- Mike A. Harris |
From: Sven L. <sve...@wa...> - 2003-05-29 05:34:39
|
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 12:00:22AM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote: > On Wed, 28 May 2003, Sven Luther wrote: > > >> > I was being sarcastic, his message was encoded with koi8-r, which, along > >> > with being html, is one of the indescriminate reasons people block email > >> > (and get a good number of false positives) > >> > >> however, foreign language encoding is separate from html email. > >> > >> blocking based on foreign language encodings is not such a good idea. > >> blocking html is not so bad, though. > > > >You need to block multi-part mails with only one html part too though, > >which is not so easy to do, i think. > > This filter doesn't catch *everything*, but for the last 6 years > or so, it has had zero false positives for me while subscribed to > limitless numbers of mailing lists. > > :0: > * ^Content-Type:.*text/html > HTML Yep, i have this too, but half the html spam i get pass trough this, and because it is : Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="E_BBFDE6F0B.95CA_CC.D7." ... This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --E_BBFDE6F0B.95CA_CC.D7. Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ... --E_BBFDE6F0B.95CA_CC.D7.-- On the other hand i don't want to catch the emails which have a text and an html section, since they are mostly valid ones. Anyway, i have almost managed to write a sed script doing this, but i am not sure if it is possible to get the value of the boundary and match on it in the address pattern when using sed. > I go through the HTML folder occasionally, and all of the stuff > is junk spam. There may be the opportunity for false positives, > but in practice over the years, I've yet to see any with my mail > load. Different people's mail usage may vary however... Yes, i agree. My problem is that i use a bayesian spamfilter (spamoracle) which learned all the html tags and thus catched valid mails which had an html part. This has been corrected since though, but i will have to retrain my database anyway. Friendly, Sven Luther |
From: David D. <dawes@XFree86.Org> - 2003-05-29 15:53:51
|
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 07:34:28AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: >On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 12:00:22AM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote: >> On Wed, 28 May 2003, Sven Luther wrote: >> >> >> > I was being sarcastic, his message was encoded with koi8-r, which, along >> >> > with being html, is one of the indescriminate reasons people block email >> >> > (and get a good number of false positives) >> >> >> >> however, foreign language encoding is separate from html email. >> >> >> >> blocking based on foreign language encodings is not such a good idea. >> >> blocking html is not so bad, though. >> > >> >You need to block multi-part mails with only one html part too though, >> >which is not so easy to do, i think. >> >> This filter doesn't catch *everything*, but for the last 6 years >> or so, it has had zero false positives for me while subscribed to >> limitless numbers of mailing lists. >> >> :0: >> * ^Content-Type:.*text/html >> HTML > >Yep, i have this too, but half the html spam i get pass trough this, and >because it is : > >Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > boundary="E_BBFDE6F0B.95CA_CC.D7." >... >This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > >--E_BBFDE6F0B.95CA_CC.D7. >Content-Type: text/html >Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >... >--E_BBFDE6F0B.95CA_CC.D7.-- > >On the other hand i don't want to catch the emails which have a text and >an html section, since they are mostly valid ones. The XFree86 mailing list filtering checks for a few different types of html-only messages, including a few levels deep of nesting (which I've seen in some spam). It does catch the occasional false-positive, but it's fairly rare, and a reasonable tradeoff given its effectiveness. >Anyway, i have almost managed to write a sed script doing this, but i am >not sure if it is possible to get the value of the boundary and match on >it in the address pattern when using sed. If you're prepared to use perl, there are packages for breaking out the mime structure. David -- David Dawes Founder/committer/developer The XFree86 Project www.XFree86.org/~dawes |
From: Sven L. <sve...@wa...> - 2003-05-30 12:11:07
|
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 11:53:32AM -0400, David Dawes wrote: > On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 07:34:28AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > >On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 12:00:22AM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote: > >> On Wed, 28 May 2003, Sven Luther wrote: > >> > >> >> > I was being sarcastic, his message was encoded with koi8-r, which, along > >> >> > with being html, is one of the indescriminate reasons people block email > >> >> > (and get a good number of false positives) > >> >> > >> >> however, foreign language encoding is separate from html email. > >> >> > >> >> blocking based on foreign language encodings is not such a good idea. > >> >> blocking html is not so bad, though. > >> > > >> >You need to block multi-part mails with only one html part too though, > >> >which is not so easy to do, i think. > >> > >> This filter doesn't catch *everything*, but for the last 6 years > >> or so, it has had zero false positives for me while subscribed to > >> limitless numbers of mailing lists. > >> > >> :0: > >> * ^Content-Type:.*text/html > >> HTML > > > >Yep, i have this too, but half the html spam i get pass trough this, and > >because it is : > > > >Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > > boundary="E_BBFDE6F0B.95CA_CC.D7." > >... > >This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > > > >--E_BBFDE6F0B.95CA_CC.D7. > >Content-Type: text/html > >Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > >... > >--E_BBFDE6F0B.95CA_CC.D7.-- > > > >On the other hand i don't want to catch the emails which have a text and > >an html section, since they are mostly valid ones. > > The XFree86 mailing list filtering checks for a few different types of > html-only messages, including a few levels deep of nesting (which I've > seen in some spam). It does catch the occasional false-positive, but > it's fairly rare, and a reasonable tradeoff given its effectiveness. Are they available somewhere so i can take a look ? > >Anyway, i have almost managed to write a sed script doing this, but i am > >not sure if it is possible to get the value of the boundary and match on > >it in the address pattern when using sed. > > If you're prepared to use perl, there are packages for breaking out the > mime structure. I would rather not use perl, if anything, i would write a small ocaml program to do it or maybe extend spamoracle which i already call. The execution cose per mail would be lower this way. Friendly, Sven Luther > > David > -- > David Dawes > Founder/committer/developer The XFree86 Project > www.XFree86.org/~dawes > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: eBay > Get office equipment for less on eBay! > http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/711-11697-6916-5 > _______________________________________________ > Dri-devel mailing list > Dri...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel |
From: David D. <dawes@XFree86.Org> - 2003-06-02 18:23:15
|
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 01:58:40PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: >On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 11:53:32AM -0400, David Dawes wrote: >> On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 07:34:28AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: >> >On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 12:00:22AM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote: >> >> On Wed, 28 May 2003, Sven Luther wrote: >> >> >> >> >> > I was being sarcastic, his message was encoded with koi8-r, which, along >> >> >> > with being html, is one of the indescriminate reasons people block email >> >> >> > (and get a good number of false positives) >> >> >> >> >> >> however, foreign language encoding is separate from html email. >> >> >> >> >> >> blocking based on foreign language encodings is not such a good idea. >> >> >> blocking html is not so bad, though. >> >> > >> >> >You need to block multi-part mails with only one html part too though, >> >> >which is not so easy to do, i think. >> >> >> >> This filter doesn't catch *everything*, but for the last 6 years >> >> or so, it has had zero false positives for me while subscribed to >> >> limitless numbers of mailing lists. >> >> >> >> :0: >> >> * ^Content-Type:.*text/html >> >> HTML >> > >> >Yep, i have this too, but half the html spam i get pass trough this, and >> >because it is : >> > >> >Content-Type: multipart/alternative; >> > boundary="E_BBFDE6F0B.95CA_CC.D7." >> >... >> >This is a multi-part message in MIME format. >> > >> >--E_BBFDE6F0B.95CA_CC.D7. >> >Content-Type: text/html >> >Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >> >... >> >--E_BBFDE6F0B.95CA_CC.D7.-- >> > >> >On the other hand i don't want to catch the emails which have a text and >> >an html section, since they are mostly valid ones. >> >> The XFree86 mailing list filtering checks for a few different types of >> html-only messages, including a few levels deep of nesting (which I've >> seen in some spam). It does catch the occasional false-positive, but >> it's fairly rare, and a reasonable tradeoff given its effectiveness. > >Are they available somewhere so i can take a look ? No, but the Perl MIME-tools package makes it easy to break down an email message recursively. This is getting off-topic for this list, but here's a code snippet: use MIME::Parser; use MIME::WordDecoder; ... $nparts = int($ent->parts); if ($nparts == 0) { $misc = $ent->head->get('content-type'); if ($misc =~ /text\/html/i) { return "single part HTML message (1)"; } } elsif ($nparts == 1) { my $e = ($ent->parts)[0]; $nparts = int($e->parts); if ($nparts == 0) { $misc = $e->head->get('content-type'); if ($misc =~ /text\/html/i) { return "single part HTML message (2)"; } } elsif ($nparts == 1) { # Maybe this should be done recursively. my $e2 = ($e->parts)[0]; $nparts = int($e2->parts); if ($nparts == 0) { $misc = $e2->head->get('content-type'); if ($misc =~ /text\/html/i) { return "single part HTML message (3)"; } } } } >> >Anyway, i have almost managed to write a sed script doing this, but i am >> >not sure if it is possible to get the value of the boundary and match on >> >it in the address pattern when using sed. >> >> If you're prepared to use perl, there are packages for breaking out the >> mime structure. > >I would rather not use perl, if anything, i would write a small ocaml >program to do it or maybe extend spamoracle which i already call. The >execution cose per mail would be lower this way. I used perl because there was a nice package available that took care of the MIME parsing for me. David -- David Dawes Founder/committer/developer The XFree86 Project www.XFree86.org/~dawes |
From: Sven L. <sve...@wa...> - 2003-05-23 07:50:26
|
On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 08:51:59AM -0700, Russ Dill wrote: > On Thu, 2003-05-22 at 07:40, Dan wrote: > > I assume it will not be news to anyone when I point out that there is a > > growing SPAM problem here. > > Surely something can be done. I know this is true because none of my > > other mailing-list mailboxes fill up like this. > > Now I know that I'm not paying for anything so I can't very well too > > loudly. It's just that there's a lot of SPAM. > > I would say run spamassasian, so you don't get the spam, but passing > through dri-devel seems to legitimize spam in the eyes of spamassasian, > so it doesn't help much. Yes, i noticed this too for spamoracle, other lists also get spam, but it is detected by spamoracle and i don't get to read it. BTW, all the spam comes in double for the dri lists and the dri-patches list. As i understand it, the dri-patches list only get information directly from the CVS changes, right, as such, it would divide by two the amount of spam sent if the dri-patches would become a closed lists, or postable only by subscribers or something such. Another idea would be to let it as such, find a new list for dri-patches, and use dri-patches to catch spam and have the mails to other list check for duplicates send to dri-patches. I don't think SF is upto something such though. > But from what I understand, its an issue with sf.net, and the only way > of stopping the spam (besides fixing sf.net) is to disallow posts from > non-members (which is probably why you don't get spam on your other > lists). I don't think this is a solution, and just to notice, i get less spam from my debian mailing list (of which i subscribe to 10 or so) than from the dri mailing lists, and the debian lists are also open. So i suppose something else must be going on. Friendly, Sven Luther |
From: Michel <mi...@da...> - 2003-05-26 10:07:29
|
On Fri, 2003-05-23 at 09:50, Sven Luther wrote: > On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 08:51:59AM -0700, Russ Dill wrote: > > On Thu, 2003-05-22 at 07:40, Dan wrote: > > > I assume it will not be news to anyone when I point out that there is a > > > growing SPAM problem here. > > > Surely something can be done. I know this is true because none of my > > > other mailing-list mailboxes fill up like this. [...] > BTW, all the spam comes in double for the dri lists and the dri-patches > list. As i understand it, the dri-patches list only get information > directly from the CVS changes, right, as such, it would divide by two > the amount of spam sent if the dri-patches would become a closed lists, > or postable only by subscribers or something such. I think only allowing subscribers to post might be a pretty good solution for dri-devel[1], but for dri-patches it's probably better to restrict it to the committers because some of them may not be subscribed to the list (with their sf.net address). [1] I'm ready to take on a share of list admin requests to handle the odd false positive, if that would be helpful. > Another idea would be to let it as such, find a new list for > dri-patches, and use dri-patches to catch spam and have the mails to > other list check for duplicates send to dri-patches. I don't think SF is > upto something such though. It might not even be worthwhile because even most of the dupes seem to have slightly different headers (and possibly bodies as well, haven't looked at those :). > i get less spam from my debian mailing list (of which i subscribe to 10 > or so) than from the dri mailing lists, and the debian lists are also > open. So i suppose something else must be going on. The Debian lists have spam filters, e.g. they do check for duplicates, which induces (even more) list lag and might cause false positives for legitimate cross-postings, so that doesn't seem like a perfect solution to me either. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer \ Debian (powerpc), XFree86 and DRI developer Software libre enthusiast \ http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer |
From: Mike A. H. <mh...@ww...> - 2003-05-26 11:39:46
|
On 26 May 2003, Michel D=E4nzer wrote: >> > > I assume it will not be news to anyone when I point out that there= is a=20 >> > > growing SPAM problem here. >> > > Surely something can be done. I know this is true because none of = my=20 >> > > other mailing-list mailboxes fill up like this. > >[...] > >> BTW, all the spam comes in double for the dri lists and the dri-patche= s >> list. As i understand it, the dri-patches list only get information >> directly from the CVS changes, right, as such, it would divide by two >> the amount of spam sent if the dri-patches would become a closed lists= , >> or postable only by subscribers or something such. > >I think only allowing subscribers to post might be a pretty good >solution for dri-devel[1], but for dri-patches it's probably better to >restrict it to the committers because some of them may not be subscribed >to the list (with their sf.net address). > >[1] I'm ready to take on a share of list admin requests to handle the >odd false positive, if that would be helpful. Some other things worth considering too, are that people who want=20 to post, but not to receive emails, can disable mailman from=20 sending them mail. Also, mailman has an "allways allow postings=20 from these addresses" setting, so that people who frequently send=20 things in, and hit the admin queue, who's contributions are=20 helpful/useful can either be subscribed by an admin, or added to=20 the "allow posts from this guy" field. I use both of these techniques on a few decent sized lists, and=20 people who post and it is rejected, almost always subscribe. =20 Those who I allow their post through, which is rare, I may add to=20 the allways allow list if I think they'll likely post again such=20 as in response to mails CC'd to multiple lists and they're not on=20 them, but their input is worthwhile. It's very little almost no=20 admin overhead for me at least. Just some thoughts I hope are useful. TTYL --=20 Mike A. Harris |
From: Andreas S. <A.S...@gm...> - 2003-05-25 14:10:35
|
Last time that topic came up, someone suggested to send mails back to the sender if he isn't subscribed to the list. If he wants the mail beeing accepted, he has to "confirm" that it isnt SPAM by replying to this returned mail. (A note how to do that should be added.) greetings, Andreas |