[gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[Andreas K. Huettel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 497 bytes --]

$SUBJECT says it all...  what do you think?

Being of a mathematical mind, I'd suggest a graylisting approach with

* exponential increase of delay times, tracked per sender
* a time-controlled decrease of the counters
-- balanced such that on average sending <= 3 mails per day incurs no 
perceptible delay. 

I have no clue if such a software already exists. It would be fun though. :)

-- 
Andreas K. Hüttel
dilfridge@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl, libreoffice)

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 981 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[M. J. Everitt]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 547 bytes --]

On 11/04/17 00:05, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> $SUBJECT says it all...  what do you think?
>
> Being of a mathematical mind, I'd suggest a graylisting approach with
>
> * exponential increase of delay times, tracked per sender
> * a time-controlled decrease of the counters
> -- balanced such that on average sending <= 3 mails per day incurs no 
> perceptible delay. 
>
> I have no clue if such a software already exists. It would be fun though. :)
>
sgtm .. how quickly can we implement it?! ...

anyone wanna CC infra@ .... ;]


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[Kent Fredric]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 317 bytes --]

On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 01:05:14 +0200
"Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@gentoo.org> wrote:

> -- balanced such that on average sending <= 3 mails per day incurs no 
> perceptible delay. 

git send-email HEAD~10

Congrats, you just punished people for submitting multiple sets of patches
to the ML for review. :/

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[Robin H. Johnson]

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 01:05:14AM +0200, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> $SUBJECT says it all...  what do you think?
TL;DR: don't engage in this arms race, the only losers are those that
play by the rules.

As kentnl, there are valid use cases for lots of emails:
- patchsets
- related-issues specifically split to one issue per thread, with
  multiple parallel threads.
- busy days of mail

It also raises a concern that mail delivered out of order can cause
severe confusion on mailing lists. Eg, I write 5 emails on a thread in
-dev. The first 3 get through immediately, but the latter ones are
delayed by the greater value of (greylist time && next-mailserver
attempt). If it happens to attempt messages 4,5, in order, but the
greylist time expires between #4 & #5, then #5 will be accepted, but #3
and #4 will not yet be accepted (until much later on if the counter
makes you wait even longer).

To forestall further questions:
- no, tracking if a mail is on a specific thread and then adding the
  thread as one of the greylisting keys is non-trivial, and can be
  worked around by suitably motivated persons.
- Suitable motivated persons can also bypass your per-sender
  restrictions by just rotating their senders, and thus putting anybody
  else at a disadvantage if they don't also do the same.

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux: Dev, Infra Lead, Foundation Trustee & Treasurer
E-Mail   : robbat2@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85
GnuPG FP : 7D0B3CEB E9B85B1F 825BCECF EE05E6F6 A48F6136

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3118 bytes --]

I think you should be more concerned with the fact there has not been a
single new developer yet in 2017. Rather than trying to further
restrict and limit a community that is NOT attracting new blood or
growing really. Which was one of the fastest growing communities.

It is sad when people cannot use means like Comrel or violations of
CoC to control things as they see fit. Then they seek other means to
limit, control, and filter people. That is hardly an open society, much
less accepting or tolerant.

Still trying to address social issues with technical solutions rather
than being social. Getting to know someone. So could say send an email,
or IRC. "Hey chill out man"....

Lets by all means not be friendly and use childish technical things to
restrict people. That could be circumvented if someone had the will.
With NO legal recourse.... The whole thing is stupid, childish and
petty.

Things have ebbs and flows. These lists go through periods of
inactivity. Then people freak out when they become active. Usually a
vocal minority having issue with dead lists becoming active.

Once again on some power trip to control others. While they are NOT
doing work... Just getting in the way of others who are...

Yet those very same do not want any control place on themselves within
Gentoo. They just want to control others outside. The whole thing is
ridiculous and Gentoo needs some serious house cleaning with people who
need to go. People need to stop with the power trips, and stop thinking
that individuals are Gentoo. No one person represents Gentoo.

For as much noise as I make. I do even more work. For others who stay
silent and seek to get in the way of people like myself. They tend to
contribute much less. To bad people cannot look at their own negative
impact. Really just hurting Gentoo. Making it past denial is the hardest
step.

The only reason Gentoo Java is still suffering. PRs open from users for
over a years. I mentioned months ago. While others stack up. That is
directly due to people like Andreas. It would be one thing if he found
others. But that is the saddest part. They drive the few away willing
to the work. Their conduct does not attract new people. Nor do they do
the work themselves. They just cause major neglect.

In tech when something bit rots people do not flock to fix it. They
migrate away from it. Java is pretty much already past the state of no
return on Gentoo. Not without major changes and a team of people
working on the stuff.

Even those with mathematical minds are not crunching the numbers. Are
they really mathematical as claimed?

X amount of packages, N amount of developers. Given attrition, lack of
new developers, and exponentially growing packages. There is a major
problem. Which can easily be seen by doing some math....

No discussions or concerns on the lack of new developers. The last ones
added were not even new. They had been around for a long time..

Good stuff. Lets keep broken bit rot toys to ourself... Others will
come fix. Yeah right....

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[Rich Freeman]

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 8:22 PM, William L. Thomson Jr.
<wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> wrote:
> I think you should be more concerned with the fact there has not been a
> single new developer yet in 2017. Rather than trying to further
> restrict and limit a community that is NOT attracting new blood or
> growing really. Which was one of the fastest growing communities.
>

Heh.  If I read threads like this every other month on the -dev
mailing list I wouldn't want to be a dev either.

IMO until we block the ability for people to go on endlessly about how
Gentoo is dying on our lists I doubt anything will change.  Reading
nonsense like this hardly inspires me to go work on ebuilds.  Neither
does being pestered by 3 other devs about replying to trolls.

The simplest solution is probably to just moderate any posts by
non-devs, and use comrel to deal with abuse by devs.  Problem solved.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3082 bytes --]

On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 20:29:46 -0400
Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 8:22 PM, William L. Thomson Jr.
> <wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> wrote:
> > I think you should be more concerned with the fact there has not
> > been a single new developer yet in 2017. Rather than trying to
> > further restrict and limit a community that is NOT attracting new
> > blood or growing really. Which was one of the fastest growing
> > communities. 
> 
> Heh.  If I read threads like this every other month on the -dev
> mailing list I wouldn't want to be a dev either.

Which brings me to wonder, what are you doing as a developer. Not in an
insulting way. However it is one thing to say I am a Gentoo developer
it is another thing to actually do development.

Git shows really low stats. You cannot argue with facts. It is not
meant to shine light on one vs another. But what gives anyone the right
to prevent another from doing tremendous work that would benefit
others. That is not being a good steward.... That is being selfish.

$ git shortlog -sn

   199  Andreas K. Huettel (dilfridge)
    41  Richard Freeman
    40  William L. Thomson Jr

I did more in my first year in 2006, not to mention later years.
https://github.com/wltjr?tab=overview&from=2006-12-01&to=2006-12-31

I do more than 40 commits in a day quite often. Just to my overlay. My
entire overlay has been created in the last year. It would not exist if
I was a developer and stuff be in tree. That does extend BEYOND java.
Just Java is the largest area effected. But I am daily adding more
stuff to my overlay in other areas that are not current or have issues.

> IMO until we block the ability for people to go on endlessly about how
> Gentoo is dying on our lists I doubt anything will change.  Reading
> nonsense like this hardly inspires me to go work on ebuilds.  Neither
> does being pestered by 3 other devs about replying to trolls.

Maybe get out of the way and let people do the work you and others are
not. You all are the ones in the way. Someday you will realize this, or
not but it is to your own and Gentoo's peril. I have moved on in many
regards.

I do not bother with anything Gentoo Java. In about a years time. I
will be decoupled from tree entirely. With current stuff, and it all
maintained.... Zero day maintained, and looking into further ways to
automate.

> The simplest solution is probably to just moderate any posts by
> non-devs, and use comrel to deal with abuse by devs.  Problem solved.

Or people get out of the way. You know the saying....

Do something! Lead follow, or.... GET OUT OF THE WAY!!!!

There is another option. You can do all this work yourself. Which goes
beyond just ebuilds. I have made tools. I have done documentation. I
have fixed other QA tools. I have ported old bad code to faster longer
term more reliable code,etc.

Its easy to see why I am not fit for Gentoo. In a vocal minorities
mind. Those with the power.... But not the will to do the work...

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[Kent Fredric]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1042 bytes --]

On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 20:41:42 -0400
"William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> wrote:

> Git shows really low stats. You cannot argue with facts. 

Please stop using git as a measure of contribution. Its inaccurate at best.

I've had to hand test and triage dozens of bugs in the time it takes
to do one commit.

A lot of useful developer time is entirely invisible from Git, git is only
one viewport, and if you use it on its own, all you see is a distorted reality.

For instance, Arch testers *by far* have the highest commit numbers.

But I don't think it would be fair to read that as either an indication that they do /more/ work
than other developers, nor would I discredit that number as being entirely meaningless.

Just the *kind* of work they do necessitates they do more commits in the course
of that work than is otherwise normal.

But you could theoretically create a bot that pumps out commits, and you wouldn't treat
it as the glorious saviour developer.

In short: 

"git" 

Is not

"facts"


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[Rich Freeman]

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 8:41 PM, William L. Thomson Jr.
<wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 20:29:46 -0400
> Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
>> The simplest solution is probably to just moderate any posts by
>> non-devs, and use comrel to deal with abuse by devs.  Problem solved.
>
> Or people get out of the way. You know the saying....
>
> Do something! Lead follow, or.... GET OUT OF THE WAY!!!!

Heh.  For a while now I've been of the mind that Gentoo would be
better off if we blocked half the people in these threads from
posting.  If that half included me I'd at least acknowledge that
somebody was doing something to fix things.  :)

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[Kent Fredric]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 720 bytes --]

On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 20:22:26 -0400
"William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> wrote:

> It is sad when people cannot use means like Comrel or violations of
> CoC to control things as they see fit. Then they seek other means to
> limit, control, and filter people. That is hardly an open society, much
> less accepting or tolerant.

The best thing about a rate limit mechanism, is instead of having to single out and blacklist
various egregious users who are an evident problem, and having to defend accusations of bias ....

You get to target the behaviour in a way that applies to everyone equally.

You can't claim somebody is getting special treatment that way.

Or do you *want* special treatment?

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[Raymond Jennings]

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kent Fredric <kentnl@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 20:22:26 -0400
> "William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> wrote:
>
>> It is sad when people cannot use means like Comrel or violations of
>> CoC to control things as they see fit. Then they seek other means to
>> limit, control, and filter people. That is hardly an open society, much
>> less accepting or tolerant.
>
> The best thing about a rate limit mechanism, is instead of having to single out and blacklist
> various egregious users who are an evident problem, and having to defend accusations of bias ....
>
> You get to target the behaviour in a way that applies to everyone equally.
>
> You can't claim somebody is getting special treatment that way.
>
> Or do you *want* special treatment?

My two cents:

We shouldn't treat everyone equally, but the basis of our
discrimination should be based on behavior, not identity.

A blind ratelimit would cause problems, since there are a number of
legitimate uses for rapid messages, of which kernel patches are one
such example.

What if the ratelimit was based on karma?  Some sort of feedback
mechanism where list readers could up/down-vote specific senders based
on quality?

My hunch is that such a mechanism would naturally weed out
unproductive discussion.

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[Daniel Campbell]

On 04/10/2017 09:19 PM, Raymond Jennings wrote:
> What if the ratelimit was based on karma?  Some sort of feedback
> mechanism where list readers could up/down-vote specific senders based
> on quality?
That turns the MLs into Reddit. Numbers create social influence and 
distract from the focus of communication. It'd be a good way to 
completely kill the MLs, though.

The simplest way I can think to implement it is adding a header. The 
benefit is existing software can already filter by header information. 
The downside is, unless you scrub it in the archives, people will see 
what scores are, and that will create far more drama than anything 
that's happened here.

I'm honestly surprised to see such recommendations.

-- 
Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer
OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net
fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C  1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1214 bytes --]

On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 12:57:07 +1200
Kent Fredric <kentnl@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 20:22:26 -0400
> "William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> wrote:
> 
> > It is sad when people cannot use means like Comrel or violations of
> > CoC to control things as they see fit. Then they seek other means to
> > limit, control, and filter people. That is hardly an open society,
> > much less accepting or tolerant.  
> 
> The best thing about a rate limit mechanism, is instead of having to
> single out and blacklist various egregious users who are an evident
> problem, and having to defend accusations of bias ....

There are a variety of problems with such. If you spend enough time
administrating mail servers, dealing with spam, etc. Some of the
comments show a lack of understanding or experience in this area. Its a
foolish approach. A waste of anyone's time to implement. I do not think
infra has loads of staff to be dealing with such...

Maybe try using sugar, friendliness, getting to know people and things
along those lines. Or just letting things be as is, and let nature
take its course. Things die off on their own, ebbs and flows.


-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[Daniel Campbell]

On 04/10/2017 04:05 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> $SUBJECT says it all...  what do you think?
>
> Being of a mathematical mind, I'd suggest a graylisting approach with
>
> * exponential increase of delay times, tracked per sender
> * a time-controlled decrease of the counters
> -- balanced such that on average sending <= 3 mails per day incurs no
> perceptible delay.
>
> I have no clue if such a software already exists. It would be fun though. :)
>
That will only get in the way of people posting. If you're okay with 
severely cutting down both the signal *and* the noise, go for it.

Personally I think it's a waste of time. Anyone who's that much of a 
problem will simply use other e-mail addresses. It only serves to curb 
the participation of people who stick with one e-mail address, which is 
most users and devs.

What sort of problem are you trying to solve?
-- 
Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer
OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net
fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C  1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[Alexander Berntsen]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 111 bytes --]

This is nonsense. Don't do this.
-- 
Alexander
bernalex@gentoo.org
https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[Roy Bamford]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1125 bytes --]

On 2017.04.11 00:05, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> $SUBJECT says it all...  what do you think?
> 
> Being of a mathematical mind, I'd suggest a graylisting approach with
> 
> * exponential increase of delay times, tracked per sender
> * a time-controlled decrease of the counters
> -- balanced such that on average sending <= 3 mails per day incurs no 
> perceptible delay. 
> 
> I have no clue if such a software already exists. It would be fun
> though. :)
> 
> -- 
> Andreas K. Hüttel
> dilfridge@gentoo.org
> Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl, libreoffice)

Its not possible to fix social problems with technology.
Gentoo society is a microcosm of the world.

When it becomes commonplace to do this sort of thing,
all the jails in the world will be empty.

Give the abusers a hug, maybe even talk to them using 
a voice/video channel.  Find out the real problem.  
A lot is lost in the written word.

Excluding people doesn't work either. Look at all the 
repeat offenders in the worlds jails.

-- 
Regards,

Roy Bamford
(Neddyseagoon) a member of
elections
gentoo-ops
forum-mods

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[Rich Freeman]

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> Its not possible to fix social problems with technology.
> Gentoo society is a microcosm of the world.
>

While not all social problems can be solved with technology, some
certainly can be.  I don't think this particular solution is the right
one, but that doesn't mean that solutions don't exist.

Our mailing lists would be unusable without spam filtering.  My life
would be less sane if I couldn't mute threads in my MUA.  Perhaps
other lives would be more sane if I muted more threads.  :)

Moderation can also be fairly effective in maintaining order in communications.

The key is just to keep it light.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3309 bytes --]

On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 15:09:30 -0400
Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Roy Bamford
> <neddyseagoon@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> > Its not possible to fix social problems with technology.
> > Gentoo society is a microcosm of the world.
> >  
> 
> While not all social problems can be solved with technology, some
> certainly can be.  I don't think this particular solution is the right
> one, but that doesn't mean that solutions don't exist.

Technology has created many more social problems than it will ever
solve. The alone together concept never existed till technology created
that. People in my LUG bragged about how technology liberated Egypt. It
is a total mess as other countries.

Does anyone have more time with all this technology doing things faster
than every before? We seem to have less and less....

For all the upsides we see. There are countless more downsides. We can
all connect. So can evil doers with your children etc. In ways unlike
ever before.

Anyone who thinks tech can solve social problems likely lacks social
skills to begin with. Thus is looking for solutions.

> Our mailing lists would be unusable without spam filtering.  My life
> would be less sane if I couldn't mute threads in my MUA.  Perhaps
> other lives would be more sane if I muted more threads.  :)

That sounds more like something dictatorships do to control things to
their preferences and liking. There is NO place for such in an
international open source project. Democracy's are hectic, chaotic, etc.

Perhaps more people need to learn self control. Hit the delete button
on emails they are not interested in. Or create filters. Or simply
ignore.

These problems are YOURS not others. If a post distracts you. Then
YOU allowed that. If you read a post. YOU chose to do that.  If
something is bothering you. YOU choose to let it bother you. Adults are
responsible for themselves. Stop blaming others!

Its funny people want to use tech against others. But they do not want
to use that tech directly for their own purposes based on their own
preferences. Filter or delete button.... Both much easier than reading
or replying....

Take me, you can easily create a filter to delete any email I compose.
Or delete any thread. Or just ignore. That is YOUR choice. You need not
impose your point of view on a larger community. That is a vocal
minority controlling the majority.

It surely will not attract others. It says these guys are controlling
jerks. Why would I want to be work with them? Thus people do not.

> Moderation can also be fairly effective in maintaining order in
> communications.
> 
> The key is just to keep it light.

You all are creating more noise in this very thread. The conversation on
-dev ended before this thread even started. That goes to show the
problem. People get involved when they need not. Just like in 08.
Rather than ignore or let things go. Lets make it into a bigger issue...

It also shows people cannot control themselves. Thus they want to rely
on others technical abilities to keep things to their liking and their
personal preference. There is NO place for such in a FOSS community.

This is exactly why people are not coming.

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[Rich Freeman]

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 4:04 PM, William L. Thomson Jr.
<wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 15:09:30 -0400
> Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
>> My life would be less sane if I couldn't mute threads in my MUA.
>
> Take me, you can easily create a filter to delete any email I compose.
> Or delete any thread. Or just ignore.

That's a great idea.  Hey, look, my MUA has this function to mute
threads.  If only I had thought to suggest doing that in the email you
replied to!

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1482 bytes --]

On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:11:23 -0400
Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 4:04 PM, William L. Thomson Jr.
> <wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 15:09:30 -0400
> > Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >  
> >> My life would be less sane if I couldn't mute threads in my MUA.  
> >
> > Take me, you can easily create a filter to delete any email I
> > compose. Or delete any thread. Or just ignore.  
> 
> That's a great idea.  Hey, look, my MUA has this function to mute
> threads.  If only I had thought to suggest doing that in the email you
> replied to!

I got that, but did you think you express it clearly? Do you think non
native English speakers can understand your meaning. Maybe make clear
suggestions such as:

"My MUA has an ingore feature. If I dislike a thread I can mute it.
You may want to see if your MUA has the same or similar feature."

Then you can say, "My life would be less sane without such a feature."

That is clear to all. I got your meaning, but being express in a
satirical manner. I just chose to point out the larger issues. After
all you have that feature, but  your CHOOSING not to use it. Hence
your replies to my post. Not only can you not control yourself enough
to use that feature that keeps  your sanity. You double down and
reply to my posts. Showing you are not ignoring...

Really good stuff!! :) Thanks for the laughs, daily!!!

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[Andrew Savchenko]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 929 bytes --]

On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:04:57 -0400 William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
[...]
> You all are creating more noise in this very thread. The conversation on
> -dev ended before this thread even started. That goes to show the
> problem. People get involved when they need not. Just like in 08.
> Rather than ignore or let things go. Lets make it into a bigger issue...
> 
> It also shows people cannot control themselves. Thus they want to rely
> on others technical abilities to keep things to their liking and their
> personal preference. There is NO place for such in a FOSS community.
> 
> This is exactly why people are not coming.

William, could you please stop poisoning lists with constant
whining? Really, I can't read a branch if it has more than a single
reply from you.

We got your point long time ago, and most of us disagree with it.
Please stop poisoning communication.

Best regards,
Andrew Savchenko

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1342 bytes --]

Why someone would post 3 days later on a dead thread is beyond me...
Some people clearly have nothing better to do!

Ever hear of letting something go? Thread died days ago, why revive?

On Fri, 14 Apr 2017 18:02:17 +0300
>
> William, could you please stop poisoning lists with constant
> whining? Really, I can't read a branch if it has more than a single
> reply from you.

Funny! Why would you bother reading anything if I am poisoning and
whining? This is a "whining" thread others started. You are doing
exactly that. This is the type of post that has no place on list. If
anything should be sent directly.

But you are literally whining in  your post calling me out for the
same. HILARIOUS!!!!

Im SOOOO sorry you cannot read a branch, called a thread, if it has more
than one reply from me... I am playing my violin for you... But wait you
read this one, and I replied more than once. Why most anyone would read
given the subject...

> We got your point long time ago, and most of us disagree with it.
> Please stop poisoning communication.

That is YOUR opinion. I will not give in to a vocal minority. YOUR
opinion is yours. How do you know most disagree? Have you done anything
factual, survey, etc. Or is that your ASSUMPTION and OPINION....

Thanks for the laughs!!!

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[Rich Freeman]

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 11:53 AM, William L. Thomson Jr.
<wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> wrote:
> Why someone would post 3 days later on a dead thread is beyond me...
> Some people clearly have nothing better to do!
>
> Ever hear of letting something go?

Is that what you call it when you let somebody else have the last word?

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-project] Per-sender rate limiting our mailing lists

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1558 bytes --]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2017 12:11:30 -0400
Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 11:53 AM, William L. Thomson Jr.
> <wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> wrote:
> > Why someone would post 3 days later on a dead thread is beyond me...
> > Some people clearly have nothing better to do!
> >
> > Ever hear of letting something go?  
> 
> Is that what you call it when you let somebody else have the last
> word?

If your not expecting a reply, do not ask a question or end that way.
If your trying to make an argument on last word. Your essentially
forcing such.

I already explained this on dev...

"If I said something to a group or individual in person. Then someone
replied. I would not ignore their reply. That is rude and
disrespectful. What others see as noise is me being polite and replying
to those who have replied to my post. It is not trying to get the last
word. It is simply being polite as I would in person. I would not walk
away mid discussion. Would you in person?"
https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/9b8cc11a5b94df7a9eaa42442b5e71bb

When someone composes an email, and says;
"William, could you please..."

That is CLEARLY addressed directly to me. Just like if someone walked
up to you and said that. Would you walk away or respond?

I guess I should be rude, ignore the message and not reply... They made
a request direct request to me, ending in a question mark.
Thus I replied. Exactly as I am now.

Rich, I thought you had the thread on "mute"....  :)

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]