> Nevertheless, procmail doesn't seem like the right answer. Perhaps not for all. But the other extreme (which some here regularly advocate) is complete openness to all - just in case they might potentially have something useful to contribute - even if the overwhelming past history strongly suggests that will never happen. We have people that post that are effectively DOS generators. Their postings are largely not taken seriously (or even read most likely) by anyone who has been an IETF contributer for any length of time. Yet they do get responded to (even the strong sometimes have moments of weakness and take the bait) and it sucks away cycles from the community that should really be directed towards more important things. Yet, by not kicking them off of lists and otherwise making it clear that they have worn out their welcome, the community sends an implicit signal to the lurkers/newcomers that even such voices are welcome and that their disruptive tactics are perfectly acceptable behavior. Even worse, it probably encourages some do to do the same. Of course, everyone should get a grace period when they start, but it should not be open ended. IMO, we are sometimes too tolerant of what should be unnacceptable behavior -- behavior that is a drain on IETF resources and produces little of use in return. IMO, it does not help the organization and it even drives away participation from those we really want to keep. Case in point: there are many long-time IETFers who do not subscribe to this list. Signal-to-noise is just too low. That should tell us something. Thomas