Proposed: change to posting rules for python-dev
There's been some talk off-list about changing the posting rules for python-dev, such that non-member post attempts are automatically rejected (i.e. bounced). This means you'd have to be a member to post to the list. I think that's not an inappropriate rule for python-dev. taking-the-pulse-of-the-list-ly y'rs, -Barry
On 30-jan-04, at 22:30, Barry Warsaw wrote:
There's been some talk off-list about changing the posting rules for python-dev, such that non-member post attempts are automatically rejected (i.e. bounced). This means you'd have to be a member to post to the list. I think that's not an inappropriate rule for python-dev.
Personally I don't see that python-dev has a problem with non-member postings. There's the occasional post that should have been sent to python-list, but that happens only once a week or so, and usually there's only one "wrong list" reply. I tend to prefer members-only only for lists where the signal-noise ratio drops below 90% or less. Even with the current virusstorm python-dev seems to keep doing pretty good. -- Jack Jansen, <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>, http://www.cwi.nl/~jack If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution -- Emma Goldman
Barry Warsaw wrote:
There's been some talk off-list about changing the posting rules for python-dev, such that non-member post attempts are automatically rejected (i.e. bounced).
Wouldn't this mean sending back mail to spammers?
This means you'd have to be a member to post to the list. I think that's not an inappropriate rule for python-dev.
Does the off-list reasoning have to do with spam messages? cheers, holger
Barry Warsaw wrote: Barry - I recently subscribed to the list after reading from the web site for several months. I wonder if the proposed policy will end up cutting off postings from people who follow the list but aren't otherwise subscibed, and if that's good or bad. Chris
There's been some talk off-list about changing the posting rules for python-dev, such that non-member post attempts are automatically rejected (i.e. bounced). This means you'd have to be a member to post to the list. I think that's not an inappropriate rule for python-dev.
taking-the-pulse-of-the-list-ly y'rs, -Barry
[Chris and Ann Reedy]
I recently subscribed to the list after reading from the web site for several months. I wonder if the proposed policy will end up cutting off postings from people who follow the list but aren't otherwise subscibed,
It would, but you could subscribe and then immediately disable email delivery for your subscription (so you'd still be a list member, and so allowed to post, but wouldn't get any email from the list).
and if that's good or bad.
It depends on which posts get bounced <wink>. I get so many spams, worms, etc, that I wouldn't notice the difference if python-dev stopped leaking them. Presumably other people would notice.
"Tim Peters" <tim.one@comcast.net> writes:
It would, but you could subscribe and then immediately disable email delivery for your subscription (so you'd still be a list member, and so allowed to post, but wouldn't get any email from the list).
This is an excellent method that I've used for a number of lists. For people who just want to post occasionally, this works very well, and I don't think it's asking to much to have them subscribe. A problem arises when people try to post from Google Groups. There may be some lists where we want to encourage that, and they (c.l.p) would need to stay open.
It depends on which posts get bounced <wink>. I get so many spams, worms, etc, that I wouldn't notice the difference if python-dev stopped leaking them. Presumably other people would notice.
Yeah, but you want them for the spam file :-) Presumably, if you turned on your Spambayes you wouldn't see any. The real problem is the archives. On a low volume list, like Idle-dev, the spam completely drowns the ham unless it's moderated out. Once in the archive, it's an annoyance for all time. The lists are screening direct spam pretty well. The current problem is all the MTA bounces complaining about the "virus you sent" or "no such user". Moderating the lists is taking a fair amount of admin time right now. At least during storms, it seems reasonable to bounce non-subscribers automatically. The bounce will tell them what to do to get posted. -- KBK
On Fri, 2004-01-30 at 19:44, Kurt B. Kaiser wrote:
Moderating the lists is taking a fair amount of admin time right now. At least during storms, it seems reasonable to bounce non-subscribers automatically. The bounce will tell them what to do to get posted.
That's really the biggest motive for my suggestion. OTOH, python-dev at the moment doesn't have a ton of held messages, because the list was actually misconfigured to accept all non-member posts until about 4 hours ago. What's there now is all unwanted (spam, virus bounces, etc). Ideally, Mailman would have a challenge-response system for non-member posters, but I don't want to get into that here. Right now, Jeremy and I are the only admins and neither of us has much time to be diligent in clearing the queue. So maybe let's turn this around: if I can get 3 volunteers to be python-dev moderators, we'll leave the current policy of holding non-member postings for approval. Otherwise, we'll auto reject them. Email me directly if you're interested. -Barry
"Barry Warsaw" <barry@python.org> wrote in message news:1075512752.1075.350.camel@anthem...
On Fri, 2004-01-30 at 19:44, Kurt B. Kaiser wrote:
Moderating the lists is taking a fair amount of admin time right now. At least during storms, it seems reasonable to bounce non-subscribers automatically. The bounce will tell them what to do to get posted.
That's really the biggest motive for my suggestion. OTOH, python-dev at the moment doesn't have a ton of held messages, because the list was actually misconfigured to accept all non-member posts until about 4 hours ago. What's there now is all unwanted (spam, virus bounces, etc).
Ideally, Mailman would have a challenge-response system for non-member posters, but I don't want to get into that here.
Right now, Jeremy and I are the only admins and neither of us has much time to be diligent in clearing the queue. So maybe let's turn this around: if I can get 3 volunteers to be python-dev moderators, we'll leave the current policy of holding non-member postings for approval. Otherwise, we'll auto reject them.
Email me directly if you're interested.
If this means something like visiting an admin page, say once a day, clicking on obvious junk, and then delete (and similar but 'admit' for obvious good stuff) yes. I would be happy to leave borderline cases (should this be clp instead) alone for 'higher' authority. Can't spurious virus bounces be filtered? They all seem so similar. Or are there occasional valid bounce messages to be dealt with? Terry
Okay folks, thanks for the offer of help. We've got enough volunteers now, so we'll continue to allow non-members to post. -Barry
Chris and Ann Reedy wrote:
Barry Warsaw wrote:
Barry -
I recently subscribed to the list after reading from the web site for several months. I wonder if the proposed policy will end up cutting off postings from people who follow the list but aren't otherwise subscibed, and if that's good or bad.
Chris
I'm in the same position; I recently subscribed after reading the list for a while, and finding a subject to which I could contribute. Andrew
There's been some talk off-list about changing the posting rules for python-dev, such that non-member post attempts are automatically rejected (i.e. bounced). This means you'd have to be a member to post to the list. I think that's not an inappropriate rule for python-dev.
taking-the-pulse-of-the-list-ly y'rs, -Barry
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/mackeith%40acm.org
There's been some talk off-list about changing the posting rules for python-dev, such that non-member post attempts are automatically rejected (i.e. bounced). This means you'd have to be a member to post to the list. I think that's not an inappropriate rule for python-dev.
I don't see a need. What is this trying to prevent? --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
Barry> There's been some talk off-list about changing the posting rules Barry> for python-dev, such that non-member post attempts are Barry> automatically rejected (i.e. bounced). Wasn't that how things worked when the list was first formed? If so, what was the rationale for the change to the current policy? Skip
On Friday 30 January 2004 07:21 pm, Skip Montanaro wrote:
Wasn't that how things worked when the list was first formed? If so, what was the rationale for the change to the current policy?
Yes, it was. I don't remember why it was changed; we were probably accused of exclusivity. That's how these things often happen. -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at acm.org> PythonLabs at Zope Corporation
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004, Skip Montanaro wrote:
Barry> There's been some talk off-list about changing the posting rules Barry> for python-dev, such that non-member post attempts are Barry> automatically rejected (i.e. bounced).
Wasn't that how things worked when the list was first formed? If so, what was the rationale for the change to the current policy?
Not quite. Historically, python-dev was a by-invite list, which definitely led to charges of exclusivity; however, anyone could *post* to the list. Barry's proposed policy would allow anyone to subscribe, but only subscribers could post. I'm overall +0, speaking as the person who most often responds to inappropriate posts. -- Aahz (aahz@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "The joy of coding Python should be in seeing short, concise, readable classes that express a lot of action in a small amount of clear code -- not in reams of trivial code that bores the reader to death." --GvR
On Fri, 2004-01-30 at 19:41, Aahz wrote:
Not quite. Historically, python-dev was a by-invite list, which definitely led to charges of exclusivity; however, anyone could *post* to the list. Barry's proposed policy would allow anyone to subscribe, but only subscribers could post.
Right! -Barry
participants (12)
-
Aahz -
Andrew MacKeith -
Barry Warsaw -
Chris and Ann Reedy -
Fred L. Drake, Jr. -
Guido van Rossum -
Holger Krekel -
Jack Jansen -
kbk＠shore.net -
Skip Montanaro -
Terry Reedy -
Tim Peters