From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Mon, 05 Feb 2007 15:48:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [209.173.210.139]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id l15Nlt3c026057 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2007 15:47:56 -0800 Message-ID: <45C7C228.2090609@sandeen.net> Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 17:47:52 -0600 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Spam on list? References: <68c491a60702050352t278e8381l72795ed9ea880029@mail.gmail.com> <200702051306.34279.ak@suse.de> <45C73CB9.5000402@sandeen.net> <1170712730.18017.452.camel@edge> In-Reply-To: <1170712730.18017.452.camel@edge> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: nscott@aconex.com Cc: Andi Kleen , =?UTF-8?B?TWFydGluIFNjaHLDtmRlcg==?= , Justin Piszcz , xfs@oss.sgi.com Nathan Scott wrote: > On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 08:18 -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> Andi Kleen wrote: >>> On Monday 05 February 2007 12:52, Martin Schröder wrote: >>>> 05 Feb 2007 11:32:25 +0100, Andi Kleen : >>>>> Please don't do that. It means nothing can be cross posted >>>>> from l-k anymore, which would be pretty bad. >>>> Then set up a list admin who can approve such postings. >>> That adds unacceptable latency. Also lists who spam senders >>> with bounce messages tend to be dropped quickly from cc lists. >>> >>> Also you couldn't list xfs@ as bug report address anymore because >>> bug report addresses must be available to everyone. >>> >>> In general it's a bad idea. > > *nod*, it really cannot become a closed list. Ok ok everyone, it was just a thought ;-) -Eric