Re: [Zope.Com Geeks] Re: [Zope-dev] zope-dev list policies
I noticed this when it went initially went by, but didn't have time to follow up. The upshot is that there is absolutely no way *under the current arrangement* that this is going to happen. I can see a way to swing it, requiring earnest volunteer effort. Here are the details. Being the administrator of many of the zope lists (probably over ten and below twenty), i am already dismayed by the challenge of the typically thirty to one hundred held spam messages, bounces, and other effluvia i have to handle *per day*. I do not know how many of the legitimate list messages would additionally be held and require more attention (with the current mailman implementation, it takes a lot more fuss to approve a held message than to discard it), but the load is already untenable, so one more is too many. There is an option, however. It's possible to add moderators to lists, separate from list administration privileges. I would be willing to set the lists to hold non-member postings, *if* there were volunteer moderators that would actually take care of some significant portion of the load - ie, i would not have to approve one non-member (alternate address) posting. (I would not mind occasionally approving a non-member/alt-addr posting if the volunteers reduced the spam/bounce handling efforts in the process.) That's the situation. Are there people that would be willing to volunteer for moderation duties? (Say which lists when you reply - and make sure to cc me directly, since i can't read most of the lists i moderate.) Ken On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, Andrew Sawyers wrote:
Leonardo Rochael Almeida wrote:
+1 for member-only posting
On Wed, 2004-06-16 at 22:24, Tim Peters wrote:
Over on the zope and zope-dev lists, there's currently agitation to make them members-only mailing lists. The point is that spam could not get thru then (unless posted by a member).
What would zodb-dev members like? [...]
+1 I propose this policy extends to all ZC managed community lists. Andrew Sawyers
Ken Manheimer wrote:
I noticed this when it went initially went by, but didn't have time to follow up. The upshot is that there is absolutely no way *under the current arrangement* that this is going to happen. I can see a way to swing it, requiring earnest volunteer effort. Here are the details.
Being the administrator of many of the zope lists (probably over ten and below twenty), i am already dismayed by the challenge of the typically thirty to one hundred held spam messages, bounces, and other effluvia i have to handle *per day*. I do not know how many of the legitimate list messages would additionally be held and require more attention (with the current mailman implementation, it takes a lot more fuss to approve a held message than to discard it), but the load is already untenable, so one more is too many.
Why would we hold non-member postings for review? Why not simply outright reject them? Andrew -- Zope Corporation Software Engineer (540) 361-1700
What proportion of the list traffic comes from valid members who are posting from alternate accounts? On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, Andrew Sawyers wrote:
Ken Manheimer wrote:
I noticed this when it went initially went by, but didn't have time to follow up. The upshot is that there is absolutely no way *under the current arrangement* that this is going to happen. I can see a way to swing it, requiring earnest volunteer effort. Here are the details.
Being the administrator of many of the zope lists (probably over ten and below twenty), i am already dismayed by the challenge of the typically thirty to one hundred held spam messages, bounces, and other effluvia i have to handle *per day*. I do not know how many of the legitimate list messages would additionally be held and require more attention (with the current mailman implementation, it takes a lot more fuss to approve a held message than to discard it), but the load is already untenable, so one more is too many.
Why would we hold non-member postings for review? Why not simply outright reject them?
Ken Manheimer wrote:
What proportion of the list traffic comes from valid members who are posting from alternate accounts?
A huge percentage was - I don't know how much is making it through to the lists though. I'm hearing a lot of complaints from people either third party, seeing it in IRC or from emails off the lists. I've recently added an increased amount of header and body checks which were not being applied yesterday as well as increased spam reject features. This should help - in any event now that it's being blocked at the MTA, Mailman's load on the server has went from 2 -3 to ~.5 on the server in the last hour. Andrew
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, Andrew Sawyers wrote:
Ken Manheimer wrote:
I noticed this when it went initially went by, but didn't have time to follow up. The upshot is that there is absolutely no way *under the current arrangement* that this is going to happen. I can see a way to swing it, requiring earnest volunteer effort. Here are the details.
Being the administrator of many of the zope lists (probably over ten and below twenty), i am already dismayed by the challenge of the typically thirty to one hundred held spam messages, bounces, and other effluvia i have to handle *per day*. I do not know how many of the legitimate list messages would additionally be held and require more attention (with the current mailman implementation, it takes a lot more fuss to approve a held message than to discard it), but the load is already untenable, so one more is too many.
Why would we hold non-member postings for review? Why not simply outright reject them?
-- Zope Corporation Software Engineer (540) 361-1700
Ken Manheimer wrote:
I noticed this when it went initially went by, but didn't have time to follow up. The upshot is that there is absolutely no way *under the current arrangement* that this is going to happen. I can see a way to swing it, requiring earnest volunteer effort. Here are the details.
Being the administrator of many of the zope lists (probably over ten and below twenty), i am already dismayed by the challenge of the typically thirty to one hundred held spam messages, bounces, and other effluvia i have to handle *per day*. I do not know how many of the legitimate list messages would additionally be held and require more attention (with the current mailman implementation, it takes a lot more fuss to approve a held message than to discard it), but the load is already untenable, so one more is too many.
I believe the proposal wasn't to *hold* non-member emails, but to bounce them or discard them, so your workload should actually be reduced. -- - Michael R. Bernstein | Author of Zope Bible michaelbernstein.com | & Zope.org Webmaster panhedron.com | PythonPhotos.org
participants (3)
-
Andrew Sawyers -
Ken Manheimer -
Michael Bernstein