Re: qconfirm in front of zsh-users@

['Roman Neuhauser' <neuhauser@bellavista.cz>]

# Andrey.Borzenkov@siemens.com / 2003-01-31 09:40:24 +0300:
> >  Roman>     1) zsh-users@ (that's what we specifically talked about,
> >  Roman> could cover -workers@ if needed) will be protected by
> >  Roman> qconfirm, which means that non-subscribers will be required to
> >  Roman> confirm their posts.
> > 
> > Is that really required based on traffic since saturday? Last
> > saturday, we installed Messagewall for all sunsite mails, so the
> > spam/vira level should have dropped to a pretty low level. So is the
> > request still valid? Have you seen a lot spam since saturday?
> 
> the spam volume has decreased but it is still there. Lists known to me that
> do use confirmation do not have spam at all. Some other high-volume lists
> (lkml as the very good example) have much better signal to noise ratio
> comparing with zsh lists.

    I think it is obvious now that MessageWall (or whatever it was that
    sunsite.dk people installed) doesn't do its work as it should. Can
    we please settle on qconfirm?

-- 
If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore
your message.    see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html