From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general/1922 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Laurent Bercot Newsgroups: gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general Subject: Re: Hassle with 'subscribers only' policy Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 17:10:28 +0200 Message-ID: <20080927151028.GA17003@skarnet.org> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1222528217 16199 80.91.229.12 (27 Sep 2008 15:10:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 15:10:17 +0000 (UTC) To: supervision@list.skarnet.org Original-X-From: supervision-return-2157-gcsg-supervision=m.gmane.org@list.skarnet.org Sat Sep 27 17:11:15 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: gcsg-supervision@gmane.org Original-Received: from antah.skarnet.org ([212.85.147.14]) by lo.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KjbRx-0004sJ-1H for gcsg-supervision@gmane.org; Sat, 27 Sep 2008 17:11:13 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 19511 invoked by uid 76); 27 Sep 2008 15:10:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact supervision-help@list.skarnet.org; run by ezmlm List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: Original-Received: (qmail 19503 invoked by uid 1000); 27 Sep 2008 15:10:28 -0000 Mail-Followup-To: supervision@list.skarnet.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general:1922 Archived-At: > Hi, I personally really dislike this 'subscribers only' post policy. For > mailing list subscriptions, I use different (private) mail addresses than those > I use for posting. When sending mail, I use different addresses in the envelope > and the header's From:. With the current 'subscribers only' policy, I have to > go through several steps to finally have a mail posted to this list, this one > now goes through gmane. I was very pleased with the confirmation requests sent > to the envelope sender, this was just a single easy extra step, and the message > was done. > > Furthermore, this mailing list is mentioned on the runit web page as contact > address for contributed run scripts. I received a complaint, and support it, > that contributing is made rather difficult, because it's that hard to get the > mail delivered, the contributor finally gave up. I totally understand, and agree with the fact the 'subscribers only' policy is a hassle. However, as you surely have noticed, this policy, coupled with subscription moderation, has totally eliminated spam. Beforehand, the mailing-list was horrendously plagued with spam, to the point that several users complained, and talked me into changing the policy. You can even find the relevant posts in the mailing-list archives. Confirmation requests sent to the envelope sender for every message doesn't work reliably enough anymore. Some robots are intelligent enough now to detect confirmation requests and reply to them; confirmation requests may reduce list spam, but do not eliminate it, far from it. It's really a choice between user convenience and security - as is the case with most systemm administration stuff. I don't want to change the policy every few months because people complain. If I listen to you and change it back to non-subscribers-only, we'll get spam again, and subscribers will protest. I don't think there's a solution that makes everyone happy, as long as IM2000 isn't out. Of course, your opinion weighs a lot, since you're the runit author and people mostly use this list to talk about runit; but still, I'm inclined to keep things the way they are now - else it will be a neverending back-and-forth movement. What do the users hate less? Spam, or lack of convenience ? -- Laurent