Subject: Ftp-WG: Moderation?

From: "Joris Dobbelsteen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 18:42:39 -0500

Seems not getting of the ground (for my opinion), however the spam level is way higher than the level of mail that is useful for this WG. Last couple weeks the only mail received from this WG was only spam.

---

From: Robert Elz <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 02:31:53 -0500

Date:        Thu, 9 Nov 2000 18:42:39 -0500
    From:        "Joris Dobbelsteen" <[email-masked]>
    Message-ID:  <[email-masked]>

  | Seems not getting of the ground (for my opinion), however the spam level
  | is way higher than the level of mail that is useful for this WG. Last
  | couple weeks the only mail received from this WG was only spam.

Yes, but let's not have a big discussion about it, or the meta-spam
will overtake the spam (again).   Of all the lists that collect spam
this one is one of the ones I like most - every few days just open the
folder, delete everything new, and done - in general even the Subject
headers don't need to be examined.   As long as the list stays idle,
the trivially small amount of spam it attracts doesn't hurt anyone
(and it is pretty small - I just fetched the best part of 5 days worth
of e-mail, this list had 3 messages, 2 spam, and yours).

I know that some people treat having received a single spam message as
if they'd been (almost) murdered, and demand similar levels of retribution,
but the problem here at least really isn't that big.   If the list can be
easily made to filter out some messages without bothering any legitimate
postings, then fine - if not, well, that's also fine.

kre

---

From: "Brad Clements" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 10:21:44 -0500

We've been around the block on this already

We don't need moderation at all, just make it so you have to be 
subscribed to post.

If you aren't subscribed, you'll get back an auto-reply telling you to 
subscribe first.

I'm sure the IETF would go for that. 

The spam level *is* higher than 3 messages in 5 days.

For example, in just two days (9th and 10th) I got 3 spam messages 
from this list.

Ftp-WG: Get a FREE $1000 Satellite T.V. System ...
Ftp-WG: Information You Requested
Ftp-WG: Save 20-70% off your Grocery Bill 

Brad Clements,                [email-masked]   (315)268-1000
http://www.murkworks.com                          (315)268-9812 Fax
netmeeting: ils://ils.murkworks.com               AOL-IM: BKClements

---

From: Kent Landfield <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 15:25:21 -0500

# We don't need moderation at all, just make it so you have to be 
# subscribed to post.
# 
# If you aren't subscribed, you'll get back an auto-reply telling you to 
# subscribe first.
# 
# I'm sure the IETF would go for that. 

The IETF already has. That is how the Usenet Format Working Group
mailing list is run. If you are a member of the list the posting is
automatically sent. If you are not a member, the posting is sent to
a person to approve in a timely fashion. For the usefor mailing list
that's me.  If a message is spam, I drop it on the floor. If it is not
I approve it for posting immediately. If the person has posted a message 
more than once and is not on the list, I will let them know that they 
should subscribe or request alternate addresses to be able to post but not
receive postings. This is not rocket science...

# The spam level *is* higher than 3 messages in 5 days.
# 
# For example, in just two days (9th and 10th) I got 3 spam messages 
# from this list.
# 
# Ftp-WG: Get a FREE $1000 Satellite T.V. System ...
# Ftp-WG: Information You Requested
# Ftp-WG: Save 20-70% off your Grocery Bill 
# 
# Brad Clements,                [email-masked]   (315)268-1000
# http://www.murkworks.com                          (315)268-9812 Fax
# netmeeting: ils://ils.murkworks.com               AOL-IM: BKClements

-- 
Kent Landfield                        Phone: 1-817-545-2502             
Email: [email-masked]             http://www.landfield.com/
Search the Usenet FAQ Archive at http://www.faqs.org/faqs/
Search the RFC/FYI/STD/BCP Archive at http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/