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 E75501382C5 for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 13:47:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 23551E0A9A; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 13:47:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ot0-x242.google.com (mail-ot0-x242.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c0f::242]) (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 DF1E7E0A98 for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 13:47:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ot0-x242.google.com with SMTP id j8-v6so2027680ota.7 for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 06:47:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=cTw4p4Jx0Y68zImAdwzVOn7tI/Ux3acjwm627viUB+w=; b=F8FWB+2XliL2k0uaYHxEjuUuJHAf6wEghqTybH5j51TY+aJhL6xRZoP9OiRV+RYlQW GRrwqCj/dZoqpjqwc4b2DwbZu8o/adWZCLCCCn+RcVrXLtSWo2r2OuK1BwwqZv7XA/Lc IGTbExjZXVRWR9sv7bzI7r3gJoBL8ZisSKFmaQwDjHcP/tmJ8Sy2VzcZ0t9dciVcwoRQ +Fgik6wGwDn0kZn5s1eZ+u6FpkWVbWaKgITe26vTOc1CWUWRtWiLkN8TAPXRBRdUGuQM gMBU3Iy45O14i7+oW0T6Q6cHXwRBxR7vJi/PvyQEXSJIF65+lcfwiy8J1b/HJXrXZNP1 EtBg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cTw4p4Jx0Y68zImAdwzVOn7tI/Ux3acjwm627viUB+w=; b=c3qGkRalBSHgbfxOUTqHtatXSc5ICLDkKDGc0TQ76uo2S3OOGsKmM5qv3dybjlbDdG Fp3c9Xo2aJ337rqAEykohb66XfPCINm8cUeS1xJeVgALPmjOuiP0Jq4Nj59z+eAfQIbs XJr5DoKKaVSbIedtCbhfLxPthmRk/0RP68NCSGIFd/VA80Q7079ge+NnOJ9oZD01bMca d04jmnfUTgW5I6E6fFQS66Vr4t6N7oV2CeEP41uhR5JpEF2nNxJ+rGHLa2tktHxKLwMX vjXlddJlMTTPsJvwqWvuofXK08NrvQMRA3eCnlNx+vqAmUzzz/+KXuG9ymlwerKXR1Tu IMIw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tATHFojTpym6spXa2j7oQQMtmgFvHMAbTuQhQo163RXPv9B7GO8 B7SBhQOj0a15gx8QwXldw4aEwjJ7cAfombeuWFA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx49WpN4Ydz/y7S6XRwGP7+5HVG9sGSRtkMF3R2w89VWVaIThqex+o6AvItV8UGttD1Q2StXE+wfUbjJ9RtMVeT0= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:56e9:: with SMTP id b38-v6mr2791466otj.382.1523454419545; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 06:46:59 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a9d:5e09:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 06:46:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <23149.51865.998621.918722@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <1517247177.1187.12.camel@gentoo.org> From: Raymond Jennings Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 06:46:18 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2018-02-11 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 04650508-b91d-4ce2-a931-09e083d79fa6 X-Archives-Hash: bf48f577ec04b571cdb33980ead7468f 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 w= rote: > On 01/30/2018 04:32 AM, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: >> >> 2. Continuation on mailing list posting restrictions >> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D >> >> 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. >