Other Directory Sites: SeekWonder | Directory Owners Forum
The following archive was created by hippie-mail 7.98617-22 on Sat Apr 10 1999 - 01:17:18
Adam Back (aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk)
Sun, 22 Nov 1998 21:30:54 GMT
Perry Metzger writes:
> Rabid Wombat writes:
> > I vote we get a moderator with experience. If we can't get Sandy to do
> > it, we should scrap the whole idea.
>
> I've already decided that I'm going to set up a moderated
> CodherPlunks-like list. I've had plenty of of experience running
> moderated lists.
I think that fragmenting lists is actually harmful. There is little
enough traffic on CodherPlunks anyway. Splitting it and creating two
lists I suspect will only serve to reduce overall traffic. People
can only cope with so many lists. Some people may find one but not
the other.
The sp*m content is negligible. There has been more traffic about
controlling sp*m than actual sp*m. Sp*m on CodherPlunks is a non-issue.
Perry proposes not just to remove spam, but to provide a moderated
CodherPlunks where (one presumes) he will cut off mid-flow any
discussions he views as getting repetitive or boring, as happens on
cryptography. I find this counter-productive, especially for
implementation discussions -- we want all of the input, not just the
bits Perry finds interesting.
I don't see how moderation benefits a list which is basically about
coding issues, typically we see questions such as `how do I generate
parameters for foo crypto-system' followed by a list of suggetions.
So what does the moderator add? Removal of duplicate suggetions?
I humbly suggest that a filtered version of CodherPlunks would be a
better way to proceed, if one were dead set on creating YACML
(yet-another-crypto-mailing-list).
Adam
The following archive was created by hippie-mail 7.98617-22 on Sat Apr 10 1999 - 01:17:18