On Mon, 11 Jan 2010, Robert Millan wrote: > Moderation would be feasible if someone volunteers to do it. > > Rejection would be feasible if this is appropiately tuned to > garantee a neglectable amount of false negatives. Even then, I don't > see the advantage in comparison with a subscriber-only policy.
The main reason is that you avoid bothering people whose mails are obviously not spam with needing to subscribe to a mailing list simply to communicate with the maintainer. > In upstream GRUB we've adopted this policy as well, for many years > now, and it's been completely uncontroversial. It tends to be uncontroversial for the people who are subscribed to the mailing list, but it's rather annoying for those who are not. (It's also less of an issue for lists which have actual discussion, instead of maintainer addresses, which are primarily used to reach the maintainer(s).) I personally will rarely bother to subscribe just to communicate information to a package maintainer, just like I rarely bother to deal with challenge/response emails. Don Armstrong -- S: Make me a sandwich B: What? Make it yourself. S: sudo make me a sandwich B: Okay. -- xkcd http://xkcd.com/c149.html http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
