gnuplot-beta

Re: Should we keep this list subscriber-only?

[Hans-Bernhard B. <br...@ph...>]

On Thu, 3 Jun 2004, Lars Hecking wrote:

> 
> > Before changing this, I'ld like a poll.  So: if anybody has strong
> > opinions in either direction, please voice them soon.
>  
>  If people who's posts are held receive a notification of the fact,
>  I'd like to keep things the way they are - 15.000 spams/month are
>  no fun.

So far, they don't get notification while it's on hold --- only if the
admin decides to reject one, they'll receive a notice stating the reason.  
Spams and worms are discarded, instead, i.e. they get no response at all.


-- 
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (br...@ph...)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.

Re: Should we keep this list subscriber-only?

[Hans-Bernhard B. <br...@ph...>]

On Thu, 3 Jun 2004, Petr Mikulik wrote:

> > I'd rather keep the list subscriber-only, and if possible to
> > auto-generate a reply to non-subscribed messages that
> > says something like:
> 
> I like the way to send a message to a group without sending two emails
> before to subscribe there, and then again to unsubscribe from there.

That's not how gnuplot-beta is set up.  Mails to the list address by
non-subscribers will quietly be put on hold (the notification of the user
about this is switched off), and end up on the list admin's desk, where we
essentially get to choose between three options:

1) approve it --> it gets posted to the list
2) reject it ---> the poster is sent a notification, by default with a
   text explaining the reason, e.g. "Posts to this mailing lists are
   only allowed by subscribers."
3) discard it ---> the submission gets deleted without leaving any trace.
   That's what I did with all the junk.

It seems I can even edit it on the fly, if I want to.

Subscribing just to squeeze a posting through the perimeter is neither
recommended nor necessary.  If that were to happen on regular basis, I may
decide to switch subscription to admin-approval mode (i.e. you can't
subscribe unless an admin OKs it).

> It may bother users so much that they won't send any message at all.

Well, maybe then they'll stop and think for a momemt whether gnuplot-beta
really is where they should be sending that message.  That may well be the
major benefit of keeping this list subscriber-only.

-- 
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (br...@ph...)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.

Re: Should we keep this list subscriber-only?

[Hans-Bernhard B. <br...@ph...>]

On Sun, 6 Jun 2004, Dave Denholm wrote:

> One problem with automatically sending back a reply is that if
> most of the incoming mail is junk, we are adding to the problem of
> unsolicited mails bouncing around the network.

Fulll ACK.  These days, completely useless "Virus found in your mail"
notices (including the particularly helpful ones in Finnish, Frensh and
whatever language you can imagine) already make up the majority of what
junk mail actually ends up in my inbox, after the virus scanner and the
spam assassin have done their job.  We *don't* want to add to that if we
can possibly help it.  And with the current setup of our SF mailing lists,
I think we're doing the right thing on that front.

> One game that people seem to play is sending mail to one list with a
> from field of another list. 

I'm quite sure it's not people who are playing this game, but clueless
mail worms and their equally clueless cousins, the address harvesters used
to fill spammers' mailing lists.

-- 
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (br...@ph...)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.