Proposed list charter/AUP change?
steve at blighty.com
Tue Jan 4 18:53:23 UTC 2005
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 10:36:03AM -0800, JC Dill wrote:
> 1) A list already exists (spam-l) where these topics are discussed
> regularly and that list is a better place to discuss them due to the
> large number of people who have in-depth knowledge and regularly
> contribute on those topics.
But there's a lack of operational expertise there. Lots of people
fascinated by email headers and so on, but far fewer with experience
deploying large systems or handling security related issues.
> 2) It is very hard to start talking about "spam" and limit the breadth
> of the replies to those that are on-topic for a network-operations
> focused list. Spam makes people angry, and angry people want to rant
> about how much they hate spammers and the various things "we" or "they"
> should do to solve the problem at the source. Angry people don't
> usually pay adequate attention to list policies so they blow over the
> policy line, time and time again.
That sounds like the problem is people who can't treat a mailing list
professionally and maintain enough personal restraint to keep the S/N
above water rather than an issue with one partcular subject of
> For that reason, I believe that spam-related topics should be discussed
> on spam-l first, and then the topic should be raised on this list only
> if you can't find the info or contacts you need on the spam-specific
> list first.
For people who want to bemoan spam and and hunt spammers, sure. For people
looking for answers to operational problems that just happen to have some
relationship to bulk email... I'm less convinced.
More information about the NANOG