Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-project (89 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [opensuse-project] foo@xxxxxxxxxxxx is a subscribers only list
- From: Pascal Bleser <pascal.bleser@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2007 01:06:14 +0200
- Message-id: <46DC9366.9030802@xxxxxxxxx>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> The openSUSE mailing lists do not strike me as particularly open.
>
> I have been contributing to free software projects for over ten years,
> but none I can remember appears as unfriendly when someone not subscribed
> to a list tries to post to that list.
I think it's pretty much the standard/default reply of mlmmj and I've
seen lots of this-is-subscribers-only replies on lots of open source
project mailing-lists.
But a nicer and more informative wording wouldn't harm, for sure.
> Why do we have such a strict setup? As evidenced by hosts like
> gcc.gnu.org, it is possibly to keep lists spam free without it.
There is another issue with non-subscribed posters: the perpetual
reply-to-list issue. Pretty much everyone has the habit of answering to
the mailing-list address and not to the OP + the list in CC, as for
subscribed members, that would mean receiving the reply twice.
How do you know how to reply (list only or OP + list in CC) if it's not
only for subscribers ?
(don't get me wrong, I'm not particularly happy with the current,
somewhat dry reply)
> *If* we need such a form of moderation, could this be human
> moderators? Frankly, with unfriendly a response like this, I
> usually think twice about contributing.
Not sure it's "unfriendly". It's not friendly, but it's not bashing
either ;)
Human moderation is though, as some of the lists are high-traffic
(opensuse@xxxxxxxxxxxx is beyond usable, and opensuse-factory isn't too
dormant either, although it remains manageable).
And how do you humanly moderate a spam that goes through to the list ?
(too late ;))
> If human moderation does not work, how about a simple scheme where
> one has to follow a URL provided in the auto-response to unlock his
> previously sent message? w3c does this very nicely, for example.
I think that having useful information on what the list is about and how
to actually subscribe to the list would be useful, but I'm not sure
whether more than that would be needed.
> Also, the message refers to a "nomail version of the list" but a
> regular user certainly will have not idea whatsoever what that is
> and how to subscribe to that version of the list.
> </rant>
>
> My recommendations are:
> 1. Abandon this level of strictness and instead use decent spam
> and virus filtering.
> 2. If this does not work sufficiently well, employ human moderation
> or a challenge/response schema.
> 3. Better describe what the "nomail version of the list" refers to.
rm 1 2 3
4. send back a much more helpful message that has a friendly tone and
explains how to properly subscribe to the list
cheers
- --
-o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/
/\\ <pascal.bleser@xxxxxxxxx> <guru@xxxxxxxxxxx>
_\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFG3JNmr3NMWliFcXcRAryGAJ9KUgzdd5LEUhLVhRIHn+sZg4YaFwCaA1Vf
BAFkMU8kV5t5ifAWJ+QLgmM=
=4RqQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Hash: SHA1
Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> The openSUSE mailing lists do not strike me as particularly open.
>
> I have been contributing to free software projects for over ten years,
> but none I can remember appears as unfriendly when someone not subscribed
> to a list tries to post to that list.
I think it's pretty much the standard/default reply of mlmmj and I've
seen lots of this-is-subscribers-only replies on lots of open source
project mailing-lists.
But a nicer and more informative wording wouldn't harm, for sure.
> Why do we have such a strict setup? As evidenced by hosts like
> gcc.gnu.org, it is possibly to keep lists spam free without it.
There is another issue with non-subscribed posters: the perpetual
reply-to-list issue. Pretty much everyone has the habit of answering to
the mailing-list address and not to the OP + the list in CC, as for
subscribed members, that would mean receiving the reply twice.
How do you know how to reply (list only or OP + list in CC) if it's not
only for subscribers ?
(don't get me wrong, I'm not particularly happy with the current,
somewhat dry reply)
> *If* we need such a form of moderation, could this be human
> moderators? Frankly, with unfriendly a response like this, I
> usually think twice about contributing.
Not sure it's "unfriendly". It's not friendly, but it's not bashing
either ;)
Human moderation is though, as some of the lists are high-traffic
(opensuse@xxxxxxxxxxxx is beyond usable, and opensuse-factory isn't too
dormant either, although it remains manageable).
And how do you humanly moderate a spam that goes through to the list ?
(too late ;))
> If human moderation does not work, how about a simple scheme where
> one has to follow a URL provided in the auto-response to unlock his
> previously sent message? w3c does this very nicely, for example.
I think that having useful information on what the list is about and how
to actually subscribe to the list would be useful, but I'm not sure
whether more than that would be needed.
> Also, the message refers to a "nomail version of the list" but a
> regular user certainly will have not idea whatsoever what that is
> and how to subscribe to that version of the list.
> </rant>
>
> My recommendations are:
> 1. Abandon this level of strictness and instead use decent spam
> and virus filtering.
> 2. If this does not work sufficiently well, employ human moderation
> or a challenge/response schema.
> 3. Better describe what the "nomail version of the list" refers to.
rm 1 2 3
4. send back a much more helpful message that has a friendly tone and
explains how to properly subscribe to the list
cheers
- --
-o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/
/\\ <pascal.bleser@xxxxxxxxx> <guru@xxxxxxxxxxx>
_\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFG3JNmr3NMWliFcXcRAryGAJ9KUgzdd5LEUhLVhRIHn+sZg4YaFwCaA1Vf
BAFkMU8kV5t5ifAWJ+QLgmM=
=4RqQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
| < Previous | Next > |