(better late than never) Agreed we shouldn't split the list. Agreed about HTML filtering. Agreed about single address. Agreed about keeping list open for non-subscribers. Don't think we should moderate. Agree w/ Greg that a mailing list with automated subscribe/unsubscribe would be nice. Jean Delvare wrote: >>>What I might do is split the lists: >>> >>>sensors-devel@ >>>sensors-users@ >> >>Is that really needed? The traffic here is quite low, splitting the >>lists doesn't seem to make much sense. > > > I agree with Greg, I'm not sure it's necessary. Most (if not all) > subscribers are developers, so we don't have to hide from ourselves (if > I'm clear). > > >>Banning HTML mail takes care of 99% of the spam that tries to get >>through to the linux-usb-* mailing lists. Sure, some of it slips >>through, but I never notice it, as my local spam filters pick them up >>usually :) > > > Sounds great. In this case, we should explicitly mention on the web page > that HTML mail will be rejected, or it's unfair to human posters. I know > nice people don't use HTML mail anyway (I am a nice guy! yeah! ;)) but > we shouldn't be too integrist with people that are just different. > > Another thing I have been suggesting for years now (OK, it's exagerated, > say months) is to keep a single address for the mailing list. Having > lm78@ *and* sensors@ doesn't double the number of interesting e-mails we > receive, but it actually doubles the amount of spam. > > >>You might want to try that, it's a good first step, which also keeps >>the lists open for non-subscribers to post to (which is a good thing, >>considering that you have to ask someone before being able to join >>this list, which I think is a bit strange...) > > > Not that strange. Or, at least, not a problem IMHO. Only very few people > need to be there, and that's how we manage to keep the number of > subscribers low. Remember it isn't a "real" mailing list. Phil is > handling it by himself. We have been having severe issues with bouncing > mails some months ago, spam is a regular question also. So, I understand > that Phil doesn't want to have too many subscribers to handle on the > list. > > Third possibility would be to moderate the posts for unsubscribed users. > Drawback is that a human intervention is needed, which means more work > for Phil (or someone else) and delayed answers since Phil (or anyone > else) is a busy man. We all are rather busy, isn't it? (And do you know > why? Because we are nice people. (TM)) This may also be technically > impossible due to the way our mailing list is handled. But that's just > an idea after all. > > OK, that was just some morling thoughts. Comments welcome, I got to go > now. >
