[ILUG] Suggestion RE: SPAM
kverens at contactjuggling.org
Wed Oct 16 11:15:03 IST 2002
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
> 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
More information about the ILUG