From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7FA271382C5 for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 07:36:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8483FE0A5A; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 07:36:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blaine.gmane.org (unknown [195.159.176.226]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32B14E0A03 for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 07:36:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1f0j7Z-0003Y2-VW for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 09:34:17 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Martin Vaeth Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Mailing list moderation and community openness Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 07:34:10 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <4aab96fa-0edb-6a28-791e-28e2103f2a30@gentoo.org> <0818a5b0-cc1e-403f-6c08-1285999de30f@gentoo.org> <20180320160316.GA5785@whubbs1.gaikai.biz> <87605qs3pi.fsf@gentoo.org> X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org User-Agent: slrn/1.0.2 (Linux) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-Archives-Salt: 6cc6e230-1bd9-49d1-8134-de68c0c88dbb X-Archives-Hash: 8061a1821b59755d71a719b538c4dbe7 Rich Freeman wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 7:54 PM, Benda Xu wrote: >> >> It boils down to an attitude of assuming outsiders are good (blacklist >> to ML) or bad (whitelist to ML) by default. ++ This is the most crucial point. It is the general attitude: Does Gentoo welcome contributions or want to make their developers live in an ivory tower? It is about openness vs. isolation. > It is > basically impossible to blacklist somebody on a mailing list, since > all they need to do is roll up a new email address. That may be technically true but it is not a problem the mailing list is currently facing. If it should eventually happen to be the case that the mailing list is filled by tons of spam of anonymous posters or faked identities causing serious problems, one can still think about changing the modus operandi. But without such an absolute need, it is very bad to restrict freedom.