On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 12:31 PM, Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > A. It gives a wider choice of tools for developers (and privileged > contributors) -- they can choose either the open or restricted mailing > list depending on the type of requested feedback. > > B. The gentoo-dev mailing list is still open for power users > and contributors to submit their own ideas, and with no moderation > the discussion can proceed naturally. >
Wouldn't those inclined to do so simply crosspost threads to the unmoderated list? Then people will feel the need to respond to those posts for all the reasons they reply to those posts already. Maybe that would not happen if the unmoderated list essentially becomes unused and has few subscribers, but in that case we are potentially turning away contributions. Also, given the reluctance to moderate anything around here in general, do we think that the moderated list would actually be moderated if it is after-the-fact? The one advantage of requiring moderation a priori is that it requires somebody to affirm "yes, this post adds to the discussion" vs having to decide "do I want to be the one to ban user xyz from the list and deal with the fallout?" That said, it does address the sock puppet issue to a large degree, unless somebody wants to be fairly painstaking at it. (And if they're willing to go to that much trouble we'd need to be screening IDs to keep them out. There is no reason somebody couldn't go through recruitment as a dev 14 times today.) -- Rich
