[Fwd: Re: [clug] RE: ?????????? ??? ????? ???????????]

David Tulloh david at tulloh.id.au
Fri Nov 21 11:40:11 GMT 2008

Paul Wayper wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> Stupid me, I once again replied personally rather than send to the list.
> - -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [clug] RE: ?????????? ??? ????? ???????????
> Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 21:39:47 +1100
> From: Paul Wayper <paulway at mabula.net>
> Reply-To: paulway at mabula.net
> To: Andrew Boyd <facibus at gmail.com>
> References: <MDAEMON0277200811201054.AA5416651 at reklamasnams.lv>
> <6e115bb00811200138t6422c40dh98b31c4440420189 at mail.gmail.com>
> Andrew Boyd wrote:
> | Not that I want to come across as the grumpy old man here, but is 
> there any
> | way we can collectively turn our massively superior intellects towards
> | f*cking this sh*t the f*ck off? :)
> Once again I propose the controversial, exclusivist and obviously 
> alienating
> idea of making the list "subscriber-post only".  Mainly because I 
> think that
> the people that want to post to the list and get a sensible reply 
> subscribe as
> a matter of course, for everyone currently reading the list it means 
> no change
> at all, and the only people who get pissed off are the spammers and the
> occasional hapless wanderer who thinks that this is, for obvious but 
> misguided
> reasons, an address for posting SaMBa questions that somehow will get 
> replied
> back to them.  That is a category of people I see little point in 
> entertaining.
Does the list software have the capability to do gray list non-subscribers?

I was thinking that making non-subscribers confirm their message would 
be more open and still get rid of all the spam.


More information about the linux mailing list