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 97D201382C5 for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2018 03:07:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5FE0DE0F1B; Wed, 4 Apr 2018 03:07:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-it0-x231.google.com (mail-it0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::231]) (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 28C84E0F19 for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2018 03:07:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-it0-x231.google.com with SMTP id z7-v6so13870011iti.1 for ; Tue, 03 Apr 2018 20:07:47 -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; bh=OHuz+plx/1K0PBzWR+3FN9lXl4X0e2bSSvuVr0sMgH4=; b=klEOnr5eCJ+09v+QcrK7/o7OjKFA5nFeBn9Fi9Sl49TRkk/CAEqocmn10V/XwE0oJ5 0k/KjWVGIHG7SvW1k19J7YxcIPJ15nxqCtj4M2pXoKppCdgcZ7fyfhtul8Agw/xrqjKB n7ghcgwPNp+MGB8nLqeHDif7MW2w/Va2DOSpvoVjeGseARZrWskl+z1u+BGceYIvfFKy gutu4PQH7MBpZppru3VWydFDSq1x/v36QvMs3sb2VQ5FCfsKYwkD+f6nZKiX8yODnwEc BfYv1vsYIBPFKQAI4mqSIUUDncT4y88s0/Hr33MkgIhrZcdkTBAtWQfCQBHkHC92RtWc 1B8g== 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; bh=OHuz+plx/1K0PBzWR+3FN9lXl4X0e2bSSvuVr0sMgH4=; b=ADfcUYaPfDL/rgEd7HBmdS8JSH8s6LTyklw+ag7m8NIw0rwGJ4p9qpQo0HfUiZxdVU g/ysS8lypvyD9TZLEE2FABTdNgNs/g4c3v1OgAKkm1gHZnqp8oON22Oy7R4F9lASSHzf kw8Bzu0x0AnIHiMeFYN7xg/yFQW7lhyzoRYGUsqRW19la1Zv3FIyBrz0jyU8DHTtimx6 0C2h+BH6kZ0dn2epF5XSdh9/UAkQFpcCEaueQvfcmgqNUiDMkCq1SSac5bWVApx+tAtm iDMoTnFz9lsBV5SyVF812ZtwUg+g0e3j7I/+TVXTLvUh+8/zzJjq8bNmd3qZ8Ze1za9p OBZQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tDfwqgRP1nw2WSLgItIgRqbr6j7X5KsGOFTWwW4dezdyIKLO5of OEZxWxj5sOb283aOtI4eKI7USeiph1qUf+gowroS7w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4+kysghNqYt71iIV1G6IYdGycdDdfL5BO0esXQmC/rx90FkNJN7v5pDvGmgngMAGvYelvtAXsSEAriX4DIr3v8= X-Received: by 2002:a24:f301:: with SMTP id t1-v6mr7832561ith.22.1522811265741; Tue, 03 Apr 2018 20:07:45 -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 10.79.208.79 with HTTP; Tue, 3 Apr 2018 20:07:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <8a0f48ab-a1f7-2bdf-4b83-6f794314a30c@iee.org> References: <8a0f48ab-a1f7-2bdf-4b83-6f794314a30c@iee.org> From: Gregory Woodbury Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 23:07:44 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Make gentoo-project a whitelisted mailing-list To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Archives-Salt: eef406d7-3202-403d-bff9-7ed8afadd3b9 X-Archives-Hash: 4f33db09c8e8953c80a7729bc61d4268 On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 7:10 AM, M. J. Everitt wrote: > I'd like to propose that the gentoo-project mailing list also becomes > white-list only to post, as there are a lot of "off-topic" posts being > submitted. I believe that the Council would have no problem with this, > as their objectives clearly include snubbing out any form of > non-technical discussion. And it begins... In this case there is an insane and inane call to moderate, in the name of making a point that doesn't exist. Ulm makes a good response so I don't need to elaborate. However, it is indicative of the sort of resentment that applying broad brush(-off) strokes with a technical solution to the essential social problems of keeping flame wars out of a technical discussion group. So what that a blacklist can be fooled by a change of identifier, the real means of controlling a difficult user is to weild a ban hammer lightly, and making sure that other users simply ignore the trolls. The ban hammer may need to be used repeatedly agains some users, but after they cannot get the irritated reactions they crave. (Perhaps by just hiding their attempts and any out-of-band responses, leaving messages only in the archive, but not distrubed to the list -- oh yeah, that's not a possibilty unless the first post from a new address gets looked at before sending it out. Hmmm, sounds like a form of robo-moderation that could be set up so that any user who cares can act as a reviewer for the robot.) Yes, this is also a technical solution, but one that supports implicitly open communications, rather than erecting a specific qualification to be allowed entry to discussions (i.e. the requirement to get someone already on the list to sponsor the new person.) I am in the process of trying to get a hold of the old s.r.u-u robot and polishing it. I just don't know where to talk about it. -- G.Wolfe Woodbury redwolfe@gmail.com