On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 10:07 PM, John Rudd<jr...@ucsc.edu> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 17:54, Aaron Wolfe<aawo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 5:01 PM, ktn<j_engl...@kawasaki-tn.com> wrote: >>> >>> Actually I think Nabble is great for those of us who can't handle the >>> traffic >>> of the whole mailing list. >>> >> >> This list generates less than 50 messages per day on average: >> >> http://gmane.org/plot-rate.php/plot.png?group=gmane.mail.spam.spamassassin.general&plot.png >> >> I've got to ask, what type of system are you using that can't handle >> this traffic? And does SA even run on such a thing :)? > > You say that as though this list is all we read. >
I interpretted the phrase "handle the traffic" to mean something the mail server was doing, not a human :) > If this list was ALL I read, instead of 100's of emails per day from > all of my list, work, personal, etc. correspondence, then that'd be > different. > > Further, this list has one of the lowest signal to noise ratios of any > of the lists I'm on (don't get me wrong, when I say noise here, I > don't mean "totally worthless", I mean "not relevant to me"). So, the > logical choice of "reducing the flood of traffic" is by cutting back > on how many of those 50-100 emails per day hit my inbox. >
