Boriss Mejias wrote: > Dear users, > > In order to let new comers to easily ask their questions, we allow > posting on this mailing-list without subscription. Somebody is in charge > of filtering the spam, where call for papers are not considered spam, so > we let them go through the mailing list. The problem is that the > quantity of CfP is growing too much, so we have the following proposal: > > - Only Mozart-Oz related questions can be posted without subscription to > the mailing list. > - Call for Papers are still accepted but only coming from subscribed > members > > This is just a proposal, so we want to hear your opinion about it. For > instance, is anybody still wanting to get the CfP from external senders? > or does anybody want to get rid of all CfP?
I think there are far too many CfPs that are only very tangentially related, if at all, to Mozart or Oz. I don't have any objection to seeing CfPs here about constraint and/or logic programming, language-based security, message passing or dataflow concurrency, etc. -- i.e. conferences about features of Oz that are somewhat unusual in more mainstream programming languages -- especially if they were all tagged with [CfP] in the subject. But I do not see the relevance of CfPs for conferences on, say, hardware debugging interfaces, VLSI design, data mining, or mathematical logics in general. It is also unnecessary to post more than an initial and final CfP for each conference, even if it is on-topic. If the effect of the subscription requirement would in practice be to get rid of the off-topic CfPs and to reduce the volume of duplicate on-topic CfPs, then that's fine. If that is tried for a couple of months and it doesn't work, then banning CfPs entirely from the Mozart-users list seems like the obvious next step. -- David-Sarah Hopwood ⚥ _________________________________________________________________________________ mozart-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.mozart-oz.org/mailman/listinfo/mozart-users
