Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2018-02-11

[Raymond Jennings <shentino@gmail.com>]

I second the motion.

That said however I would personally not be against having individuals
personally banned or blacklisted or restricted or whatnot at the
discretion of the proper authorities should they engage in misconduct.

Such as proctors for example.

I also would be ok with people being sanctioned on a separate basis if
they should evade such a restriction.

Blatant spammers are an obvious example of being worthy of restriction.

All of the above said, however...I would not be against requiring
messages posted to the list (or any list for that example) to be
required to pass anti-spam measures, such as SPF or DKIM.

In that note, I would also like to suggest that SPF/DKIM be used as a
filter for messages being posted to the lists if they aren't already.

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 2:02 AM, Michael Palimaka <kensington@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 01/30/2018 04:32 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>
>> 2. Continuation on mailing list posting restrictions
>> ====================================================
>>
>> We haven't enforced the gentoo-dev posting restrictions so far. I have
>> been approached by a user yesterday who wrongly thought he couldn't post
>> to the list. I think this situation is at least confusing.
>>
>> I believe we should either withdraw the earlier decision and explicitly
>> announce that posting to gentoo-dev will not be restricted to avoid
>> further confusion, or enforce it (how?).
>>
>> That said, I think the list has improved for now, so maybe we don't need
>> to do that after all. Especially given the upcoming possibility of
>> Proctors revival and/or moderation via mailman.
>>
>
> I'd just like to voice my support for withdrawing the earlier decision
> and keeping the mailing list open to all. Open communication channels
> are critical for maintaining an open community.
>