On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 02:44:15PM -0700, Tony Luck wrote: > On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 02:31:11PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 03:29:18PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 08:55:56 -1000 > > > Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 at 08:49, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Well here's a task: write a bot which follows the mailing lists and > > > > > sends people nastygrams if one of their emails is more than 95%(?) > > > > > quoted text. > > > > > > > > I think that might be better off as a spam filter rule. > > > > > > > > Don't make it some after-the-fact "trawl the lists". Just make it a > > > > bounce with a "you quoted too much". Same as the html avoidance. > > > > > > > > Make it ok to quote 15 lines of commit message for a "Reviewed-by:" > > > > kind of reply, but if it's more than 50 lines of quoting, trigger a > > > > "at least equal parts new message". > > > > > > > > I'm sure Konstantin has nothing better to do... > > > > > > > > Linus > > > > > > Paul, > > > > > > Just in case you are wondering why one day one of your replies gets > > > rejected ;-) > > > > You never know. Those who would have otherwise received my replies > > might be very happy with this outcome. ;-) > > > > Thanx, Paul > > Hmm. > > Thirty-two lines of quoted message. > > Only two lines of response. > > [Not including signature] > > You are skating close to the edge of a 95% quote rule filter unless > it counted the signature. > > But > this > might > also > cause > people > to > go > to > silly > lengths > to > avoid > having > their > message > cancelled! ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) Thanx, Paul
