SLUG Mailing List Archives
Re: [chat] Re: [SLUG] List Policy
- To: invisible ink <jdub@xxxxxxxxxxx>, slug-chat@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [chat] Re: [SLUG] List Policy
- From: Jon Biddell <jon@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun Oct 7 16:52:07 2001
- Reply-to: jon@xxxxxxxxx
On Sun, 7 Oct 2001 16:27, invisible ink wrote:
> begin Mary Gardiner quotation:
> > It's useful for stopping large attachments, eg SirCam, although Mailman
> > also holds > 40kb messages for approval, and does catch the occasional
> > bit of spam. It has changed the signal to noise ratio not a jot.
> We do most of that with filters; I'm always very surprised to see a spam
> come through to the list because we have to moderate and discard so many.
> >  The last time SirCam came through though, one of the admins appears
> > to have approved the half-a-meg post. No one owned up.
Why not just ban all attachments to the list, no exceptions. If you want to
send someone a file, or send it to a group of people, send them directly, not
to the list.
The only "exception" would be that an attachmnent of such vital importance is
sent to one or more of the list admins directly and they must send it to the
list - although I cannot presently see any possible reason to do this.