Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1998 01:18:15 +0200 From: Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no> To: Yoav Cohen-Sivan <ycs@netvision.net.il>, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Better SNR suggestion for the mailing lists Message-ID: <19980904011815.33295@follo.net> In-Reply-To: <35EF1D18.FF4A06B3@netvision.net.il>; from Yoav Cohen-Sivan on Fri, Sep 04, 1998 at 01:50:00AM %2B0300 References: <35EF0C6D.C3ACAD5F@netvision.net.il> <xzpbtowsvjl.fsf@hrotti.ifi.uio.no> <19980904002302.28650@follo.net> <35EF1D18.FF4A06B3@netvision.net.il>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Sep 04, 1998 at 01:50:00AM +0300, Yoav Cohen-Sivan wrote: > Eivind Eklund wrote: > > > > The problem with this is the same as requiring subscriptions for > > posting at all - a lot of us are subscribed through different accounts > > than we post from (I, for instance, am subscribed through my > > FreeBSD.ORG account except for the lists where I made a mistake), and > > it is not very practical to have to post through those addresses. > > > > I can see two solutions: > > 1) Resubscribe using your regular posting address. It is an > inconvenience, but a small _one-time_ inconvenience to pay for clean > lists. > > 2) Add an option, so that when one subscribes he can list a set of > e-mail addresses he'll use for posting. > > I have no idea how feasible #2 is, it sure sounds like a load on the > mailing list server. It seems to me #1 is ideal. It is not convenient, especially if combined with a 'have to be on an address that has been subscribed for a long time to post' policy. > Out of curiosity, why would someone consciously subscribe from an > address he doesn't use? Do you use aaa@bbb to post, but read from > ccc@ddd? How many people do this routinely? _Many_, at least among the committers. I do it because I want to be able to move the list mail around by just changing my .forward, instead of having to unsubscribe and resubscribe all the lists. This is convenient e.g. if I go to visit and work with somebody... > > I think a moderated list for architecture discussions is a better way > > of handling this, and have thus volunteered to moderate one (I'd like > > not to have to, but it seems like the only way to get a really good > > list). > > Now, _that_ is a lot of work. I can't see how everybody suffering a bit > from #1 above is worse than slowly driving a couple of moderators crazy > ;-) Well, moderated lists generally have more benefits than closed-to-post lists. The problems are mostly when discussions start warping with the regular subscribers, anyway... Eivind. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980904011815.33295>