[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: (no subject)

From: Gary V. Vaughan
Subject: Re: (no subject)
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 00:00:41 +0100

Hi Paul,

On 31 May 2005, at 22:52, address@hidden wrote:
Hi all;

Sad to say I've had to unsubscribe from this list.  Without any
moderation, it's simply forwarding waaaaay to much spam to my account
for me to stay subscribed.  When my spam filters bounce the mail back
(not my choice: my company manages them and nothing I can do about it),
then Mailman gets upset and disables my account.  Tres annoying.

Yes, it does suck.  A lot.  :-(  I have the opposite problem... my mail
provider has aggressive server side spam filtering, and I have bayesian
filtering in each of the mail clients I use to read my IMAP accounts,
but they have all been trained with a different set of sample data, and
often disagree with each other.  I found your mail in my junk folder
for example (which is a fluke to some extent, because the dozen or so gnu
lists I subscribe to fill my junk folder at a rate of a few  hundred
messages a day which I have to scan by eye for false positives).

Spam is a real problem no matter how we look at it.  And it saddens me
that both of our productivities are compromised because of it.

Hopefully some brave soul(s) will step forward and offer to moderate the
mailing list--believe me I know what a pain moderation is: I had to
enable it on all the GNU make mailing lists a year or two ago as it was
getting out of control.  Moderation is annoying, but it's the best
alternative we have so far.

I certainly don't have the time to moderate the lists I subscribe to, and
frankly, I'd rather not have anyone else waste good development and
documentation time on doing it either.

I am, however, seriously thinking of hosting an alternative list, initially for subscribers of the libtool dev lists, that uses more radical automated antispam measures than are currently acceptable on a gnu hosted list. I'd be interested in your input as to what those measures might be, and whether you (or anyone else here for that matter) would be happier in a list hosted
in this way.

Here are a few starters (some or all may be nonsense!):

i)   require a hashcash key ( to post
ii)  only accept correctly gpg signed messages from subscribers
iii) require manual authorisation through the web to obtain a
     key that needs to be added to the mail to be accepted to
     the list
iv)  renew the keys periodically, by return of mail for each
v)   queue all list messages until the sender returns a random
     string mailed back to them on receipt (to weed out address

If you want to reply, please CC me or I won't see it :-).

Cheers, and good luck all.

Thanks for the heads up. This may turn out to be the final push I needed
to do something about this problem.

Long term, I hope to prove that there is a better way to host gnu
development and bug lists, and push the solution back to the FSF...

Gary V. Vaughan ())_. gary@ {,},address@hidden
Research Scientist   ( '/
GNU Hacker           / )={libtool,m4}
Technical Author   `(_~)_

Attachment: PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]