[ILUG] Suggestion RE: SPAM

[Kae Verens]

Vincent Cunniffe wrote:
> David Neary wrote:
>> It's been suggested often in the past, and the same arguments get
>> trawled out. In the end, the roaming users win (that is, people
>> who (for example) post from work, where they're not subscribed,
>> or while on holiday with a throw-away hotmail account, etc). And
>> also non-list members who occasionally hear about the list and
>> post a question to see what the fuss is about before joining.
> 
> 
> There's also the issue of random people on the net who google for
> technical things and find ILUG's archives, and then post questions
> here.
> 
> ILUG is a surprisingly useful technical resource for a lot of people,
> and closing it off would, I suspect, kill it to an extent.
> 
> I have never heard of any meddling with the social structure of a
> thriving list (splitting it into pro/newbie lists, closing it,
> moderating it, etc.) which achieved what was intended, and frequently
> it kills the structure of the list completely.

what's technical about allowing people to read mails, but requiring they 
subscribe before allowing posts?

-- 
Kae Verens               _______\_   webworks.ie
work: www.webworks.ie       _____\\__   webhosts
play: www.contactjuggling.org  ___\\\___  design
kae:  kverens.contactjuggling.org _\\\\____ code