Robert J. Clark wrote:
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002 18:00:47 -0400 (EDT)
R P Herrold [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have copied RMS (who seems able to get attention grin) on
poll results: 6 in favor, 0 opposed, 5 new pieces of spam at
the moment.
Definitely +1
- Rob
+1
inFavor++;
but i agree to Stephes remark:
Posters who post non-conformant meeting the foregoing criteria will
be silently unsubscribed.
This bothers me. Newbies will often post from an html mailer (like
Outlook or the latest Netscape). I'd rather they get a warning/notice
that the
-Original Message-
From: R P Herrold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 8. april 2002 19:58
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: PROPOSAL: Addressing the list's spam issue: was: [GB2312]
±ÜÃâåeÎóµÄÍâÙQÐÐäN·½Ê
-- CVS developers -- How say you?
Yes!
Please do so :-)
Thanks
anders
dag nabbit ... (see below after snipage...)
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 20:29:52 +0800
From: [GB2312] ¹ú¼ÊóÒ×ÁªÑ¶Íø [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [GB2312] ±ÜÃâåeÎóµÄÍâÙQÐÐäN·½Ê½
html
head
meta http-equiv=Content-Type content=text/html;
R P Herrold said:
Proposal: I propose to undertake to offer to moderate. If so
designated, in moderating, my moderation will initially
consist of turning on the option to catch and hold, pending
discard, all non-subscriber posts. I seek to manage held
posts at least daily, often a couple
[ On Monday, April 8, 2002 at 13:58:15 (-0400), R P Herrold wrote: ]
Subject: PROPOSAL: Addressing the list's spam issue
Proposal: I propose to undertake to offer to moderate. If so
designated, in moderating, my moderation will initially
consist of turning on the option to catch and hold
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Beachey, Kendric wrote:
Were it up to me, every message I ever write would be in plain old text, but
our dad-blamed Exchange server insists on HTML-ifying my messages as it
hands them to the outside world.
No worry. html posted from _subscribers_ would not be caught
by
Absolutely! I have never before seen such an egregious example of list
abuse by spammers.
Before moderation, how about the simpler step of simply denying all posts
by non-members? I can see no legitimate reason why a CVS user would want to
post to the list and not receive replies.
But if that
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Les Bell wrote:
Before moderation, how about the simpler step of simply denying all posts
by non-members? I can see no legitimate reason why a CVS user would want to
post to the list and not receive replies.
Re-read my proposal --- that _was_ my approach grin
I have
R P Herrold [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have copied RMS (who seems able to get attention grin) on
poll results: 6 in favor, 0 opposed, 5 new pieces of spam at
the moment.
If a CVS-greenhorn and cvs-l-newcomer like me has the right to vote,
then I am *definitely* for your proposal.
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, R P Herrold wrote:
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Les Bell wrote:
Before moderation, how about the simpler step of simply denying all posts
by non-members? I can see no legitimate reason why a CVS user would want to
post to the list and not receive replies.
Re-read my proposal
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, R P Herrold wrote:
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Les Bell wrote:
Before moderation, how about the simpler step of simply denying all posts
by non-members? I can see no legitimate reason why a CVS user would want to
post to the list and not receive replies.
Re-read my
Yes, please. Sounds like a very reasonable plan.
Thank you very much for addressing this.
-Russ Tremain
On Monday, April 8, 2002 at 13:58:15 (-0400), R P Herrold wrote: ]
Subject: PROPOSAL: Addressing the list's spam issue
Proposal: I propose to undertake to offer to moderate. If so
in_favor++;
snip
--
Maybe Computer Science should be in the College of Theology.
-- R. S. Barton
___
Info-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002 18:00:47 -0400 (EDT)
R P Herrold [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have copied RMS (who seems able to get attention grin) on
poll results: 6 in favor, 0 opposed, 5 new pieces of spam at
the moment.
Definitely +1
- Rob
___
Info-cvs
1 more in favour...
loking att my deleted spam mailbox, the number of spam that I get through
this list is about 90% or up to 95% of all the spam I get
mostly I only read the list or use it as a source for finding the
information i need, but all the spam has made me consider to drop this
Definitely in favour.
Thanks!
- Original Message -
From: R P Herrold [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 12:58 PM
Subject: PROPOSAL: Addressing the list's spam issue: was: [GB2312]
±ÜÃâåeÎóµÄÍâÙQÐÐäN·½Ê
dag nabbit ... (see below after snipage
R P Herrold [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
snip
Proposal: I propose to undertake to offer to moderate. If so
designated, in moderating, my moderation will initially
consist of turning on the option to catch and hold, pending
discard, all non-subscriber posts. I seek to manage held
posts at
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 01:58:15PM -0400, R P Herrold wrote:
Proposal: I propose to undertake to offer to moderate.
+1!
--
| | /\
|-_|/ Eric Siegerman, Toronto, Ont.[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| | /
Outlook not so good. That magic 8-ball knows everything!
I'll ask about Exchange Server
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 01:58:15PM -0400, R P Herrold wrote:
Proposal: I propose to undertake to offer to moderate. If so
+ 1
Frank
___
Info-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
20 matches
Mail list logo
