14 Aug
2003
14 Aug
'03
5:28 a.m.
Hi folks, your friendly temporary list-admin here.
(Joern's on vacation and I'm filling in.)
We seem to be getting quite a lot of spam lately.
Currently the list is "open" - non-members can post.
I'd like to take an informal poll:
Should the LAD list remain totally open, or should
non-member postings require moderator approval?
I should point out that the LAU list requires approval
for non-member postings, and it seems to be no problem
in my very-limited experience managing the lists:
I check the pending-approval queue at least once a day, find
nothing but spam, and throw it away. Approving a legit non-member
posting would be trivially easy.
--
Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com
Look! Up in the sky! It's GILDED THANATOS MYRKSKOG!
(random hero from isometric.spaceninja.com)
14 Aug
14 Aug
5:41 a.m.
On Thursday 14 August 2003 17:12, Paul Winkler wrote:
Hi folks, your friendly temporary list-admin here.
(Joern's on vacation and I'm filling in.)
We seem to be getting quite a lot of spam lately.
Currently the list is "open" - non-members can post.
I'd like to take an informal poll:
Should the LAD list remain totally open, or should
non-member postings require moderator approval
I should point out that the LAU list requires approval
for non-member postings, and it seems to be no problem
in my very-limited experience managing the lists:
I check the pending-approval queue at least once a day, find
nothing but spam, and throw it away. Approving a legit non-member
posting would be trivially easy.
6:01 a.m.
On Thursday 14 August 2003 17:25, ljp wrote:
On Thursday 14 August 2003 17:12, Paul Winkler wrote:
Second that. Non-member postings should be approved. On a mailing list I run I
take the extra step and flag all new members as moderated, until they post
something that isn't spam. Usually the first post will be spam, or will be
legitimate. I approve the poster after the first post if it's legit, or
remove them from the list if it's spam. This stops spammers from subscribing
to the list with a throwaway account and spamming anyway.
t
--
GPG: http://n12turbo.com/tarragon/public.key
Hi folks, your friendly temporary list-admin
here.
(Joern's on vacation and I'm filling in.)
We seem to be getting quite a lot of spam lately.
Currently the list is "open" - non-members can post.
I'd like to take an informal poll:
Should the LAD list remain totally open, or should
non-member postings require moderator approval 
5:50 a.m.
Thursday 14 August 2003 09:12 skrev Paul Winkler:
Hi folks, your friendly temporary list-admin here.
(Joern's on vacation and I'm filling in.)
We seem to be getting quite a lot of spam lately.
Currently the list is "open" - non-members can post.
I'd like to take an informal poll:
Should the LAD list remain totally open, or should
non-member postings require moderator approval?
There is some crossposting occuring that, atleast sometimes, is worth while.
If the list is closed this won't be possible if not all senders are members
of all the mailinglists, and that is hardly the purpose.
I wondered a while ago, if it would be possible to do some sort of
mailinglist-ring thingy.
The purpose being to keep a central repository of ALL subscribers, to be able
to allow crossposting. I have no idea whether the mailinglist softwares
support anything like this...
/Robert
I should point out that the LAU list requires approval
for non-member postings, and it seems to be no problem
in my very-limited experience managing the lists:
I check the pending-approval queue at least once a day, find
nothing but spam, and throw it away. Approving a legit non-member
posting would be trivially easy.
11:04 a.m.
Robert Jonsson <robert.jonsson(a)dataductus.se> writes:
There is some crossposting occuring that, atleast
sometimes, is
worth while. If the list is closed this won't be possible if not all
senders are members of all the mailinglists, and that is hardly the
purpose.
This actually works fairly well already (in reverse).
I did reply-all to a message sent to both LAD and LAU (without
realizing it) back when I was not subscribed to LAU. I got a sensible
response saying that since I was not subscribed my message was
awaiting moderator approval. The moderator approved my message after
perhaps half a day.
Once I realized what had happened, I subscribed to LAU as well.
Problem solved. :-)
So, I would vote++ for the suggestion to moderate non-member postings.
--
Jack O'Quin
Austin, Texas, USA
6:15 a.m.
At 05:12 PM 14/08/2003, Paul Winkler wrote:
We seem to be getting quite a lot of spam lately.
Currently the list is "open" - non-members can post.
I'd like to take an informal poll:
Should the LAD list remain totally open, or should
non-member postings require moderator approval?
I should point out that the LAU list requires approval
for non-member postings, and it seems to be no problem
in my very-limited experience managing the lists:
I check the pending-approval queue at least once a day, find
nothing but spam, and throw it away. Approving a legit non-member
posting would be trivially easy.
I think that this list should be for members only, and it is not that hard
to join anyway. If they really want us to get the message, they would join.
Regards
Luke
----------------
Luke Yelavich
AudioSlack Founder and main package maintainer
Audio software packaged for the Slackware Linux Distribution
http://www.audioslack.com
luke(a)audioslack.com
12:25 p.m.
New subject: Reason for current policy, was Re: [linux-audio-dev] Should the list be members-only?
One more bit of information... I'm not sure if everybody knows that
there was a good reason the list policy was set to open.
*please follow up to the other thread*, this is just an aside...
The list is open.
You can post messages even if you are not subscribed. This is
necessary to make cross-postings and participation from people on the
ALSA and linux-kernel lists possible. It also means we have to live with
the occasional spam.
It can be helpful to subscribe and lurk for a while before you join
the discussion to familiarize yourself with the the habits of the tribe :)
So, changing policy would mean the list-admin volunteer(s) would get
bombarded with approval requests every time there's a thread crossposted.
This would also really slow down those discussions.
Mailman does provide a tantalizing option: you can require the list address
be in the explicit destinations (to or cc), which we already do;
and then provide addresses which are considered equivalent to the list
address as acceptable destinations.
However, I assume this option does not override the non-member policy.
It would be very odd if it did! But would be handy for our purposes -
not much (if any) spam has both linux-audio-dev and linux-kernel or
alsa-devel in the explicit recipients.
--
Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com
Look! Up in the sky! It's SQUEEGIE GUY PSEUDO SOUP!
(random hero from isometric.spaceninja.com)
1:10 p.m.
New subject: Reason for current policy, was Re: [linux-audio-dev] Should the list be members-only?
Hallo,
Paul Winkler hat gesagt: // Paul Winkler wrote:
One more bit of information... I'm not sure if
everybody knows that
there was a good reason the list policy was set to open.
[...]
Without saying my opinion (which is ambivalent, because I use
spamassassin and often don't see the spam coming through) I'd like to
make a point that a poll on this list will only get responses from
members of the list. A non-regular poster will of course probably not
speak up now to keep the list open.
I am on a lot of mailing lists, I filter with procmal, scan with
spamassassin and my email address is on so many webpages, I don't need
to protect it anymore.
But a casual poster might just look for an answer to a single question
and might not want to follow all the discusscions on the list by
subscription. That's a reason for keeping this list open. It may not
be a strong one though, but might probably be stronger for LAU actually.
Just my 2 cent thingie enlargement.
ciao
--
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
2:50 p.m.
New subject: Reason for current policy, was Re: [linux-audio-dev] Should the list be members-only?
On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 04:55:41PM +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Without saying my opinion (which is ambivalent,
because I use
spamassassin and often don't see the spam coming through)
I don't know why I didn't think of this before, but I'm going to
look into getting SpamAssasin in the pipe *before * mailman,
which can then require moderator approval for anything spammish.
--
Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com
Look! Up in the sky! It's SPIFFY MIDGET!
(random hero from isometric.spaceninja.com)
1:29 p.m.
New subject: Reason for current policy, was Re: [linux-audio-dev] Should the list be members-only?
On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 10:09:24 -0400
Paul Winkler <pw_lists(a)slinkp.com> wrote:
One more bit of information... I'm not sure if
everybody knows that
there was a good reason the list policy was set to open.
*please follow up to the other thread*, this is just an aside...
The list is open.
You can post messages even if you are not subscribed. This is
necessary to make cross-postings and participation from people on the
ALSA and linux-kernel lists possible. It also means we have to live with
the occasional spam.
It can be helpful to subscribe and lurk for a while before you join
the discussion to familiarize yourself with the the habits of the tribe :)
most of body deleted.
Hi,
When this was discussed on lmkl the answer from Matti Aarnio -- co-postmaster of
vger.kernel.org was:
"Running lists _closed_ doesn't solve the thing either. It would
be enough for a spammer to fake source address that is known poster
to a list."
regards Örjan
2:25 p.m.
New subject: Reason for current policy, was Re: [linux-audio-dev] Should the list be members-only?
On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 03:57:12PM +0200, ?rjan Askhult wrote:
Hi,
When this was discussed on lmkl the answer from Matti Aarnio -- co-postmaster of
vger.kernel.org was:
"Running lists _closed_ doesn't solve the thing either. It would
be enough for a spammer to fake source address that is known poster
to a list."
That is true, but in practice that does not seem to be happening.
We're just getting a bunch of spam from non-subscribed addresses.
--
Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com
Look! Up in the sky! It's WIZARD PROTO FEDORA!
(random hero from isometric.spaceninja.com)
2:42 p.m.
New subject: Reason for current policy, was Re: [linux-audio-dev] Should the list be members-only?
I agree, most of the spammers are not smart enough to do it or evcen
bother. They buy list of email addresses and probably now our lists
address is in one of the lists. We can either change our policy or email
address.
On Thu, 14 Aug 2003, Paul Winkler wrote:
That is true, but in practice that does not seem to be happening.
We're just getting a bunch of spam from non-subscribed addresses.
19 Aug
19 Aug
12:27 p.m.
New subject: Reason for current policy, was Re: [linux-audio-dev] Should the list be members-only?
On Thu, 14 Aug 2003, Paul Winkler wrote:
On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 03:57:12PM +0200, ?rjan
Askhult wrote:
as a sidenote, paul, when you change the config, make sure the subscriber
list remains protected from public view.
Hi,
When this was discussed on lmkl the answer from Matti Aarnio -- co-postmaster of
vger.kernel.org was:
"Running lists _closed_ doesn't solve the thing either. It would
be enough for a spammer to fake source address that is known poster
to a list."
That is true, but in practice that does not seem to be happening.
We're just getting a bunch of spam from non-subscribed addresses.
14 Aug
14 Aug
12:28 p.m.
On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 03:12:55AM -0400, Paul Winkler wrote:
Should the LAD list remain totally open, or should
non-member postings require moderator approval?
Given the amount of spam we're having the last days, I'd
say the list should be moderated for non-members, and for
new members until they've posted something on-topic.
--
FA
19 Aug
19 Aug
12:22 p.m.
On Thu, 14 Aug 2003, Paul Winkler wrote:
Hi folks, your friendly temporary list-admin here.
(Joern's on vacation and I'm filling in.)
chiming in from my vacation (i'm currently in thorsh"fn, north
iceland wih a friend and she lets me use her machine :)
the only reason lad has been open was to facilitate cross-posting from
alsa-* and kernel lists. since by now pretty much everybody with an
interest in lad affairs is on the list, my vote is to close the list.
paul, thanks for keeping the lists while i'm away !
best,
joern
We seem to be getting quite a lot of spam lately.
Currently the list is "open" - non-members can post.
I'd like to take an informal poll:
Should the LAD list remain totally open, or should
non-member postings require moderator approval?
I should point out that the LAU list requires approval
for non-member postings, and it seems to be no problem
in my very-limited experience managing the lists:
I check the pending-approval queue at least once a day, find
nothing but spam, and throw it away. Approving a legit non-member
posting would be trivially easy.
--
Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com
Look! Up in the sky! It's GILDED THANATOS MYRKSKOG!
(random hero from isometric.spaceninja.com)
7795
days inactive
7800
days old
linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
18 comments
14 participants
participants (14)
-
Alfons Adriaensen -
Axel Müller -
Dave Phillips -
Frank Barknecht -
Jack O'Quin -
John Littler -
J�rn Nettingsmeier -
ljp -
Luke Yelavich -
mawali＠news.icns.com -
Paul Winkler -
Robert Jonsson -
Tarragon Allen -
Örjan Askhult