From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2215 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2003 11:49:34 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 31 Jan 2003 11:49:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 26488 invoked by alias); 31 Jan 2003 11:49:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-users-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 5852 Received: (qmail 26481 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2003 11:49:04 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO sunsite.dk) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 31 Jan 2003 11:49:04 -0000 X-MessageWall-Score: 0 (sunsite.dk) Received: from [62.168.44.50] by sunsite.dk (MessageWall 1.0.8) with SMTP; 31 Jan 2003 11:49:3 -0000 Received: from freepuppy.bellavista.cz (freepuppy.bellavista.cz [10.0.0.10]) by mail.bellavista.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43DB945E for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:49:06 +0100 (CET) Received: by freepuppy.bellavista.cz (Postfix, from userid 1001) id E5DA92FDAF5; Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:49:05 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:49:05 +0100 From: 'Roman Neuhauser' To: 'zsh users' Subject: Re: qconfirm in front of zsh-users@ Message-ID: <20030131114905.GP896@freepuppy.bellavista.cz> Mail-Followup-To: 'zsh users' References: <86hec1hwo2.fsf@karthy.karthy.net> <6134254DE87BD411908B00A0C99B044F03A0B62C@mowd019a.mow.siemens.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6134254DE87BD411908B00A0C99B044F03A0B62C@mowd019a.mow.siemens.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i # 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